06-4946-cr

USA v. Rivera 1 UNI TEDSTATE S COURT OF APPEALS 2 3 FOR THE SECOND CIRCUI T 4 5 Aug ustTe rm, 20 07 6 7 (Ar gue d: Apr il 22, 20 08 D eci ded : O cto ber15 , 2 008 ) 8 9 Doc ketNo . 0 6-4 946 -cr 10 11 12 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x 13 UNI TEDST ATE S O F AMER ICA , 14 15 App ell ee, 16 17 18 - v .- 19 CARLOS F. RI VERA, a.k .a. 20 21 CHAVIN 197 0, a.k .a. LATINRI CAN70 , 22 Def end ant -Ap pel lan t. 23 24 25 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x 26 Bef ore : JAC OBS , C hie f Judg e, KEARSE , KATZ MANN, 27 28 Cir cui t Judg es. 29 30 Car los Ri ver a a ppe als fr om a j udgmen t c onv ict inghi m o f 31 fiv e c oun ts inv olv ingth e s exu al abu se of chi ldr en, en ter ed 32 fol low inga jur y v erd ictinth e U nit ed Sta tes Di str ictCo urt 33 forth e D ist ric t o f C onn ect icu t ( Kra vit z, J.) . On app eal , 34 Riv erach all eng es (in teral ia) th e s uff ici enc y o f t he 35 evi den ce on his co nvi cti on forpr odu cti on of chi ld 36 por nog rap hy, ar gui ng tha t c ert ainph oto gra phs we re not2 1 “la sci vio us” wi thi n t he mea nin g o f t he chi ld por nog rap hy 2 law s. Weaf firm. 3 MAR JOR IE M. SMI TH, Pi erm ont , N Y, 4 forDe fen dan t-Appe lla nt. 5 6 ERI C J . G LOVER, Ne w H ave n, CT 7 (Ke vinJ. O’ Con nor , U nit ed 8 Sta tes At tor ney , D ist ric t o f 9 Con nec tic ut, onth e b rie f, 10 Wil liam J . N ard ini , o f c oun sel ), forAp pel lee . 11 12 13 DENNIS JACOB S, Chi ef Jud ge: 14 15 Car los Ri ver a a ppe als fr om a j udgmen t o f c onv ict ion 16 ent ere d o n O cto ber24 , 2 006 , i n t he Uni tedSt ate s D ist ric t 17 Cou rt forth e D ist ric t o f C onn ect icu t ( Kra vit z, J.) , 18 fol low inga jur y t ria l a t whic h h e w as fou nd gui ltyof 19 cha rge s i nvo lvi ng sex ual explo ita tio n o f c hil dre n. Th ose 20 cha rge s i ncl ude d c oer cio n a nd ent ice men t t o s exu al con duc t, 21 tra vel wi th int enttoen gag e i n s uchco ndu ct, an d t he 22 pos ses sio n a nd pro duc tio n o f c hil d p orn ogr aph y. As a 23 rec idi vis t, Riv erawa s s ent enc ed to a m and ato ry term o f l ife 24 imp ris onmentonth e c onv ict ionfo r p roduci ng chi ld 25 por nog rap hy. T wo iss ues pr ese nte d o n a ppe al (mi sjo ind er of 26 the of fen ses ag ain st the mi nornamedBr ian , a nd sen ten cin g) 27 are co ntr oll ed by est abl ish ed pre ced entan d a re add res sed 28 bri efl y b elo w.Be cau se thevi cti ms of Riv era ’s cri mes we re min ors , 1 onl y t hei r f irs t n ame s w ere gi venattr ial . 3 1 We wri te pri mar ilytoco nsi derth e D ist ric t C our t’s 2 jur y i nst ruc tio n o n t he mea nin g o f “ las civ iou s” forpu rpo ses 3 of 18 U.S .C. § 225 6(2 )(A )(v ). Ri ver a c ont end s t hathi s 4 pho tog rap hs of a n ake d 1 6-y earol d m ale ona beddono t 5 sat isf y t he sta tut oryde fin iti on. 6 7 BACKGR OUND 8 The ev ide nce sh owe d apa tte rn of pre dat oryco ndu ct. 9 Riv erame t b oys inIn ter netch at roo ms, ex cha nge d s exu all y 10 exp lic it mes sag es andph oto gra phs wi th the m, andar ran gedto 11 mee t t hemfo r i lli citse xua l e nco unt ers . Dur ingon e s uch 12 enc oun ter , R ive ra cre ate d t he pho tog rap hs tha t g rou nd his 13 con vic tio n f or pro duc tio n o f c hil d p orn ogr aph y. 14 Fou r o f R ive ra’ s v ict ims te sti fie d a t t ria l, as fol low s 15 in ourbr iefan d b owd ler ize d s umm ary . 1 16 Bri an tol d R ive ra tha t h e w as twe lve ye ars ol d a nd 17 liv ed in Neb ras ka. A fte r s ome mo nth s o f o nli ne cha ts abo ut 18 sex(i ncl udi ng exp lic it vid eo ima ges ofRi ver a), Br ian 19 dis clo sedth at his famil y w as tak inga tri p t o W ash ing ton , 20 D.C . Riv eradr ovefr om his Co nne cti cutho me, ch eck ed int o4 1 the ho tel wh ereBr ianan d h is fam ilywe re sta yin g, and 2 ent ice d B ria n t o h is roo m f or sex --p ost ingno tes wi th his 3 scr eenname on a t rai l t o h is roo m, giv ingBr iana roo m-k ey 4 (wh ichBr ianhi d f romhi s p are nts an d t henre tur ned ), 5 con fro nti ng Bri an in the lo bby(w ithhi s p are nts ne arb y), 6 andle avi ng his ro om doo r a jar . GSA-11 . Whe n B ria n 7 app ear ed, th ey eng age d i n o ral an d a nal se x. GSA-14 . By 8 tha t t ime , B ria n w as thi rte en yea rs old . 9 Gar ret t t oldRi ver a t hathe wa s f ift eenye ars ol d ( in 10 fac t, he was fo urt een ). Ri ver a e nga gedGa rre tt in exp lic it 11 onl ine ch ats , a nd arr ang ed an enc oun terne ar the ir homes in 12 Con nec tic ut. G arr ettbi cyc ledtoa hot el nea r h is hou se 13 whe re Riv eraha d s ugg est ed tha t t heyme et. Whenth ey wer e 14 una ble toge t aro om, Ga rre tt dec lin ed to acc omp anyRi ver a 15 to his ho use . A w eekla ter , t heyme t i n t he woo ds out sid e 16 Gar ret t’s ho use , wher e t heyha d a nal se x. GSA-57 . Gar ret t 17 ask ed Riv eratobu y h im a p ain tba ll gunfo r h is bir thd ay. 18 Whe n G arr ettso ugh t t o d ise nga ge, Ri ver a t hre ate nedtote ll 19 all toGa rre tt’ s m oth er; Ga rre tt thr eat ene d t o c all th e 20 pol ice . GSA-61 . 21 Dav id was si xte en yea rs oldwh en he metRi ver a o nli ne. 22 Dav id agr eedtome et Riv erafo r s ex, an d R ive ra arr ive d5 1 aro undmi dni ghtatDa vid ’s home i n Mass ach use tts . Dav id 2 sne ake d o ut whi le his pa ren ts sle pt andwe nt to a h ote l w ith 3 Riv era . Aft er thetw o s how ere d t oge the r, Riv erato ok 4 sev era l p hot ogr aph s o f D avi d l yin g n ake d o n t he hot el bed . 5 Dav id tes tif iedth at Riv era“s ugg est ed a f ew pos iti ons ” a nd 6 tha t h e “ compli ed. ” GSA-65 . Sixofth e p hot ogr aph s w ere 7 int roduce d a t t ria l t o e vid enc e R ive ra’ s p roduct ionofch ild 8 por nog rap hy. A fte r o ral an d a nal se x, Riv eradr ove Da vid 9 home. GSA-67 . 10 Whe n M ich ael wa s s ixt een , h e a nd Riv eraha d o nli ne 11 cha ts abo ut sexan d e xch ang ed pho tog rap hs of the mse lve s, 12 clo the d a nd unc lot hed . Mic hae l t est ifi ed tha t a fte r h e 13 ref use d t o meetRi ver a f or sex , “ he bla ckm ail ed me andsa id 14 he was go ingtose nd tho se pic tur es tha t I se nt himto 15 ano the r s tud entth at goe s t o m y s cho ol. ” GSA-71 . 16 Riv erawa s c apt ure d b y t he pol ice af terBr ian ’s mot her 17 fou nd an inc rim ina tin g n ote . A s tat e t roo per , p osi ng as 18 Bri an, en gag ed Riv erainanIn ter netch at abo ut wha t h ad 19 tra nsp ire d b etw eenth em. Whenhe wa s a rre ste d, Riv era 20 dec lin ed to sig n afo rm att est ingth at he hadwa ive d h is 21 Mir and a r igh ts; ho wev er, he ag ree d t o b e i nte rvi ewe d b y t he 22 aut hor iti es fortw o h our s. Attr ial , t he arr est ingpo lic eTh e c har t g ath ere d d ataun derth e f oll owi ng hea der s: 2 name, age , y ear , v irg in (Y or N), an d “ fuc ked ” ( numberof times) . Thego ver nme nt als o i ntr odu ceda han dwr itt en ver sio n o f t he same c har t. Th e t emp lat e, sav ed und er fil e n ame “B lac kMa il. doc ,” 3 sta ted : Hey__

___ _ I de cid ed to bla ckm ail yo u. U W ILL hav e s ex wit h ME i n r eal LI FE, ag ain , a nd you WIL L l et me mak e aPO RN vid eo wit h y ou. IF youdo n’tdoas I sayan d l et me do wha t I wa nt, I’l l w rit e t o y ourPAREN TS at thi s a ddr ess __

___ _ 6 1 det ect ivete sti fie d t hatdu rin g t he int erv iew , R ive ra 2 adm itt ed to hav ingha d s ex wit h B ria n, whohe th oug ht 3 “lo oke d y oun g.” GSA-45 -46 . 4 A s pec ial ag entofth e F BI tes tif iedtoth e c ont ent s o f 5 Riv era ’s lap topco mpu ter , whic h i ncl ude d b etw een2, 000 an d 6 3,0 00 pho tog rap hs of min ors en gag ed in sex ual ly exp lic it 7 con duc t, inc lud ingth e p ict ure s R ive ra too k o f D avi d a nd 8 pho tog rap hs of Gar ret t a nd Mic hae l t hatth ey hadse nt him ; a 9 cha rt det ail ingRi ver a’s se xua l e nco unt ers (whic h l ist ed 10 bot h G arr ettan d B ria n); th e r eco rd of an onl ine ch at in 2 11 whi ch Riv eragl oat ed abo ut hav ingha d s ex wit h s eve ral bo ys 12 (in clu din g G arr ettan d B ria n); an d ate mpl ate bl ackmai l 13 let terth rea ten ingtote ll a m ino r’s pa ren ts tha t t hei r 14 chi ld is gayun les s t he min or agr eedtoma ke a p orn ogr aph ic 15 vid eo wit h R ive ra andtoco nti nue ha vin g s ex wit h h im. T he 3AndI wil l l et the m k nowth at youar e GAY. I wil l als o s endth em inf o a bou t y ouron lin e “ act ivi tie s” “ch ats ” a nd wil l a lsote ll the m wher e t heyca n fin d m ore in fo/ NO TE: IFyo u b ani sh [si c] fro m onl ine wi tho ut giv ingintomyde man ds I w ill sti ll do wha t I ju st sai d a bov e. U c an’ t h ide , U wil l b e t he los er.

7 1 gov ernmen t a lsoin tro duc ed int o e vid enc e r eco rds ofth e 2 ema ils an d o nli ne cha ts Riv eraha d e xch ang ed wit h B ria n, 3 Gar ret t, Dav id andMi cha el. 4 The ju ry con vic tedRi ver a o n a ll fiv e c oun ts: tw o 5 cou nts ofco erc ionan d e nti cement , i n v iol ati on of 18 U.S .C. 6 § 2 422 (b) , o ne cou nt of tra vel wi th int enttoen gag e i n 7 ill ici t s exu al con duc t, in vio lat ionof18 U. S.C . §24 23( b), 8 one co untofpr odu cti on of chi ld por nog rap hy, invi ola tio n 9 of 18 U.S .C. § 225 1(a ), andon e c oun t o f p oss ess ionofch ild 10 por nog rap hy, invi ola tio n o f 1 8 U .S. C. § 2 252 A(a )(5 )(B ). In 11 spe cia l i nte rro gat ori es acc omp any ingth e v erd ictonco unt 12 fou r ( forpr odu cti on of chi ld por nog rap hy) , t he jur y 13 ide nti fie d f ourofth e p hot ogr aph s o f D avi d a s v isu al 14 dep ict ion s o f s exu all y e xpl ici t c onduct(aph ras e e xpl ain ed 15 in the Di str ictCo urt ’s jur y c har ge) , a nd the ref ore ch ild 16 por nog rap hy. 17 The Di str ictCo urtimpos ed con cur ren t s ent enc es of: 48 08 1 mon ths ’ i mpr iso nme nt on cou nts on e a nd two ; 4 80 mon ths ’ 2 imp ris onmentonco untth ree ; t he man dat oryte rm of lif e 3 imp ris onmentonco untfo ur; an d 2 40 mon ths ’ i mpr iso nme nt on 4 cou nt fiv e. Th e D ist ric t C our t a lsoimpos ed man dat oryan d 5 dis cre tio nar y r est itu tio n f or the vi cti ms’ lo sse s, inc lud ing 6 the ir psy chi atr ic tre atmentan d c are . 7 8 DIS CUS SION 9 Riv eraar gue s t hathi s p hot ogr aph s o f D avi d d o n ot 10 con sti tut e c hil d p orn ogr aph y, tha t i s, tha t t he evi den ce was 11 ins uff ici entfo r aco nvi cti on on cou nt fou r; in the 12 alt ern ati ve, heco nte nds th at the ju ry was mi sle d b y t he 13 Dis tri ct Cou rt’ s i nst ruc tio ns. R ive ra als o c hal len ges th e 14 Dis tri ct Cou rt’ s d eni al of his mo tio n t o s eve r t he cou nts 15 rel ati ng to Bri an fro m t he cou nts re lat ingtohi s o the r 16 vic tim s. La stl y, Riv erach all eng es his se nte nce on 17 con sti tut ion al gro und s. 18 19 I 20 It is ill ega l t o e nti ce or coe rce a min or to eng age in 21 “se xua llyexpli citco ndu ct forth e p urp ose ofpr odu cin g a ny 22 vis ual de pic tio n o f s uchco ndu ct. ” 18 U.S .C. § 225 1(a ).“G ive n t o o r e xpr ess inglu st; le che rou s” or 4 “[e ]xc iti ng sex ual de sir es; sa lac iou s.” T he Ame ric an Her ita ge Dic tio nar y o f t he Eng lis h L ang uag e ( 4thed . 2 006 ). 9 1 “[S ]ex ual ly exp lic it con duc t” is def ine d t o i ncl ude th e 2 “la sci vio us exh ibi tio n o f t he gen ita ls or pub ic are a o f a ny 3 per son .” Id . §22 56( 2)( A)( v). 4 The te rm “la sci vio us” is no t s elf -de fin ing . See Un ite d 5 Sta tes v. Vi lla rd, 88 5 F .2d11 7, 121 (3 d C ir. 19 89) 6 (“What eve r t he exa ct par ame ter s o f ‘ las civ iou s e xhi bit ion ,’ 7 we fin d i t l ess re adi ly dis cer nab le tha n t he oth er, mo re 8 con cre te typ es of sex ual ly exp lic it con duc t l ist ed in 9 sec tio n 2 256 (2) .”) ; U nit ed Sta tes v. Hi ll, 32 2 F . S upp . 2 d 10 108 1, 108 4 ( C.D . C al. 20 04) (“ Las civ iou sne ss is an elu siv e 11 con cep t, andco urt s h ave st rug gle d t o d eve lopa tes t f or 12 ide nti fyi ng it. ” ( foo tno te omi tte d)) . Butse e U nit ed Sta tes 13 v. Fra biz io, 45 9 F .3d80 , 8 5 ( 1stCi r. 200 6) (“T he sta tut ory 14 sta nda rd nee ds no ado rnment .”) . The di cti ona ry def ini tio n 4 15 is of lit tlehe lp in dra win g l ine s. 16 The le adi ng cas e i s U nit ed Sta tes v. Do st, 63 6 F . S upp . 17 828 (S .D. Ca l. 198 6), af f’dsu b n om. Un ite d S tat es v. 18 Wie gan d, 812 F. 2d 123 9 ( 9thCi r. 198 7). T her e, dis tri ct 19 jud ge Tho mps on enumer ate d s ix fac tor s t hat“t he tri er of 20 fac t s hou ld loo k t o . . . amon g a ny oth ers th at maybe10 1 rel eva nt in thepa rti cul ar cas e.” I d. at 832 . The “D ost 2 fac tor s” are : 3 1) whe the r t he foc al poi nt of the vi sua l 4 dep ict ionis onth e c hil d’s ge nit ali a o r p ubi c 5 are a; 6 7 2) whe the r t he set tin g o f t he vis ual de pic tio n 8 is sex ual ly sug ges tiv e, i.e ., in a p lac e o r 9 pos e g ene ral ly ass oci ate d w ithse xua l 10 act ivi ty; 11 12 3) whe the r t he chi ld is dep ict ed in an 13 unn atu ral po se, orinin app rop ria te att ire , 14 con sid eri ng the ag e o f t he chi ld; 15 16 4) whe the r t he chi ld is ful ly or par tia lly 17 clo the d, or nud e; 18 19 5) whe the r t he vis ual de pic tio n s ugg est s 20 sex ual co yne ss or a w ill ing nes s t o e nga ge in 21 sex ual ac tiv ity ; 22 23 6) whe the r t he vis ual de pic tio n i s i nte nde d o r 24 des ign ed to eli cita sex ual re spo nse inth e 25 vie wer . 26 27 Id. 28 Her e, the Di str ictCo urtch arg ed the ju ry as fol low s, 29 usi ng theDo st fac tor s: 30 The te rm las civ iou s e xhi bit ionme ans a 31 dep ict ionwh ichdi spl ays orbr ing s t o v iewto 32 att rac t n oti ce to the ge nit als orpu bicar ea 33 of min ors inor dertoex cit e l ust ful nes s o r 34 sex ual st imu lat ioninth e v iew er. 35 36 Notev eryexpos ure ofth e g eni tal s o r 37 pub ic are a c ons tit ute s ala sci vio us 38 exh ibi tio n. Inde cid ingwh eth er a p art icu lar 39 dep ict ionco nst itu tes a las civ iou s e xhi bit ion11 1 whi ch dis pla ys or bri ngs tovi ew to att rac t 2 not ice toth e g eni tal s o r p ubi c a reaofmi nor s 3 in ord er to exc ite lu stf uln ess orse xua l 4 sti mul ati on in the vi ew, yo u s hou ld con sid er 5 the fo llo win g ques tio ns . . . . 6 7 A-7 0 . The co urtth en des cri bedth e D ostfa cto rs. 8 Riv erapr ess es twoar gument s o n a ppe al: fi rst , t hatth e 9 pho tos ofDa vidta kenbyRi ver a d o n ot fitth e p aramet ers of 10 the Do st fac tor s, i.e ., tha t t he evi den ce was in suf fic ien t 11 to sup por t aco nvi cti on und er the ju ry cha rge th at was 12 del ive red ; a nd sec ond , t hatth e D ostfa cto rs the mse lve s a re 13 inf irm , a nd hav e b eencr iti ciz ed by man y c our ts. 14 15 A 16 A d efe nda nt cha lle ngi ng the su ffi cie ncyofth e e vid enc e 17 “be ars a hea vy bur den .” Un ite d S tat es v. Gri ffi th, 28 4 F .3d 18 338 , 3 48 (2dCi r. 200 2). “ Noton ly mus t t he evi den ce be 19 vie wedinth e l igh t m ostfa vor abl e t o t he gov ernmen t a nd all 20 permis sib le inf ere nce s d raw n i n i ts fav or, bu t i f t he 21 evi den ce, th us con str ued , s uff ice s t o c onv inc e a ny rat ion al 22 tri er of fac t o f t he def end ant ’s gui lt bey onda rea son abl e 23 dou bt, ” t he con vic tio n mustst and . Uni tedSt ate s v . 24 Mar tin ez, 54 F. 3d 104 0, 104 2 ( 2d Cir . 1 995 ) ( int ern al 25 cit ati on omi tte d).12 1 A r eas ona ble ju ry cou ld- -an d d id- -fi nd tha t t he fou r 2 pho tog rap hs dep ictth e l asc ivi ous ex hib iti on of a m ino r’s 3 gen ita ls. T he ima ges al l s howDa vidly ingna kedona hot el 4 roo m b ed, hi s g eni tal s p rom ine nt at or abo ut the ce nte r o f 5 the fr ame . Twoofth e p hot ogr aph s d epi ct Dav id loo kin g 6 dir ect ly at thecamer a: in one , D avi d i s l yin g o n h is che st, 7 his up perbo dy rai sedonhi s e lbo ws, wh ile he lo oks ov er his 8 lef t s hou lde r t owa rd the camer a; in ano the r, Dav id lie s o n 9 his ba ck, th e r igh t s ide ofhi s b odyre sti ng on his ri ght 10 elb ow. 11 Alt hou gh the Do st fac tor s a re notde fin iti ona l, the y 12 are us efu l f or ass ess ingth e s uff ici enc y o f e vid enc e, and 13 pos e ques tio ns tha t a re (atle ast ) g erm ane toth e i ssu e o f 14 las civ iou sne ss. H ere , a ll fou r p hot ogr aph s a rgu abl y s ati sfy 15 sev era l D ostfa cto rs: a bedis “g ene ral ly ass oci ate d w ith 16 sex ual ac tiv ity ,” Dos t, 636 F. Su pp. at83 2, andsois th e 17 pos e, lyi ng dow n w ithle gs spr ead ; t he sub jec t i s n ake d; one 18 pho to, inwh ichth e s ubj ect ’s hea d i s t urn ed to an uns een 19 obs erv er (th e p hot ogr aph er) su gge sts se xua l e nco unt er; an d 20 the ge nit al are a i s t he foc al poi nt. F ina lly , t hes e i mag es 21 hav e c ont extth at rei nfo rce s t he las civ iou s i mpr ess ion . 22 Dav id tes tif iedth at Riv eraar ran gedth e p ose s a nd too k t he13 1 pho tog rap hs. R ive ra was re spo nsi ble fo r t he mis e-e n-s cèn e. 2 A r eas ona bleju ry cou ld the ref ore fi nd tha t R ive ra compos ed 3 the im age s i n o rde r t o e lic it a s exu al res pon se in a v iew er4 -hi mse lf. T hes e i mag es are un que sti ona bly“l asc ivi ous ” 5 mat eri al, th e p roduct ionofwh ichCo ngr ess in ten dedto 6 crm iin ali ze. 7 8 B 9 “We re vie w d e n ovoth e p rop rie ty of jur y i nst ruc tio ns. ” 10 Uni tedSt ate s v . N aiman, 21 1 F .3d40 , 5 0 ( 2d Cir . 2 000 ). “A 11 jur y i nst ruc tio n i s e rro neo us if it mis lea ds the ju ry as to 12 the co rre ct leg al sta nda rd or doe s n ot ade qua tel y i nfo rm the 13 jur y o n t he law .” Un ite d S tat es v. Wal sh, 19 4 F .3d37 , 5 2 14 (2dCi r. 199 9) (in ter nal qu ota tio n m ark s o mit ted ). Th e 15 gov ernmen t a rgu es tha t w e s hou ld rev iewfo r p lai n e rro r 16 bec aus e R ive ra didno t o bje ct to the ju ry ins tru cti ons on 17 the pr eci se gro undhear gue s o n a ppe al. W e n eedno t r eso lve 18 tha t i ssu e, how eve r, bec aus e w e a ffi rm the Di str ictCo urt ’s 19 jur y i nst ruc tio n a s a n a ccu rat e s tat eme nt of the la w. 20 As Riv eraar gue s, use ofth e D ostfa cto rs has pr ovo ked 21 mis giv ing s. Se e, e.g ., Fra biz io, 45 9 F .3dat88 (“ [T] he 22 Dos t f act ors ha ve fos ter ed myr iaddi spu tes th at hav e l ed14 1 cou rts fa r a fie ld fro m t he sta tut oryla ngu age . . . . [ T]h ere 2 is a r iskth at theDo st fac tor s w ill be us ed to 3 ina ppr opr iat elyli mitth e s cop e o f t he sta tut ory 4 def ini tio n.” ); Hil l, 322 F. Su pp. 2dat10 85 (“Whil e t he 5 Dos t f act ors at tempt to bri ng ord er andpr edi cta bil ityto 6 the la sci vio usn ess in qui ry, th ey are hi ghl y m all eab le and 7 sub jec tiv e i n t hei r a ppl ica tio n.” ). Bu t s ee Vil lar d, 885 8 F.2 d a t 1 22 (“[ T]h e D ostfa cto rs pro vid e s pec ifi c, sen sib le 9 mea nin g t o t he term ‘ las civ iou s,’ a term whic h i s l ess th an 10 cry sta l c lea r.” ). 11 Tel lin gly , n ear ly all ofth e D ost -fa cto r c rit ics ha ve 12 lin ed up beh indanar gumentth at is of no hel p t o R ive ra. 13 The ir und erl yin g c onc ernis th at the fa cto rs swe ep too 14 nar row ly, i. e., th at “[t ]he st and ardemplo yedbyth e 15 dis tri ct cou rt was ov er- gen ero us to the de fen dan t . . . . ” 16 Wie gan d, 812 F. 2d at 123 9 ( emp has is add ed) ; s ee als o 17 Fra hiz io, 45 9 F .3dat88 (e xpr ess ingco nce rn tha t “ the 18 Dos t f act ors wi ll be use d t o i nap pro pri ate ly lim it the sc ope 19 of the st atu tor y d efi nit ion ”); Un ite d S tat es v. Wol f, 890 20 F.2 d 2 41, 24 5 & n. 6 ( 10t h C ir. 19 89) (“ We do notho ld tha t 21 mor e t hanon e D ostfa cto r mustbe pr ese nt to con sti tut e a 22 vio lat ionof18 U. S.C . §22 51( a). ”). H owe ver , t his ca se15 1 off ers nooc cas ionfo r c ons ide rin g t he cir cum sta nce s, if 2 any , i n whic h t he Dos t f act ors mi ghtpr ove to o “ gen ero us” to 3 def end ant s, an iss ue the Go ver nme nt doe s n ot pre ss on 4 app eal . 5 Muc h c rit ici sm has fo cus ed on the fi fthDo st fac tor , 6 whi ch ask s “ whe the r t he vis ual de pic tio n s ugg est s s exu al 7 coy nes s o r awi lli ngn ess toen gag e i n s exu al act ivi ty. ” 8 Dos t, 636 F. Su pp. at83 2. Ondi rec t a ppe al in Dos t, the 9 Nin th Cir cui t c ons ide redth at inquir y “ ove r-g ene rou s t o t he 10 def end antinimply ingas toth e 1 7-y ear -ol d g irl th at the 11 pic tur es wou ld notbela sci vio us unl ess th ey sho wedse xua l 12 act ivi ty or wil lin gne ss to eng age init .” Wi ega nd, 81 2 F .2d 13 at 124 4. Toth at cou rt, th e f act or loo kedth e w ron g w ay- - 14 “la sci vio usn ess is no t ach ara cte ris ticofth e c hil d 15 pho tog rap hedbu t o f t he exh ibi tio n whic h t he pho tog rap her 16 set s u p f or an aud ien ce tha t c ons ist s o f h ims elfor 17 lik emi nde d p edo phi les .” Id . The co urtimpli ed tha t a 18 simple r, mor e s ubj ect ive te st was ca lle d f or: “t he pic tur es 19 wer e a n e xhi bit ion ,” andth e “ exh ibi tio n w as of the 20 gen ita ls” ; “ [i] t w as a l asc ivi ous ex hib iti on bec aus e t he 21 pho tog rap herar ray ed it to sui t h is pec uli ar lus t.” I d. 22 Sev era l o the r c our ts hav e c onc urr ed in thi s c rit iqu e. Se e,16 1 e.g ., Fra biz io, 45 9 F .3dat89 (“ The ab sen ce of a s exu al 2 come-o n . . . d oes no t meanth at an ima ge is notla sci vio us 3 . . . . C hil dre n d o n ot cha rac ter ist ica llyha ve cou nte nan ces 4 inv iti ng sex ual ac tiv ity , a nd the st atu te doe s n ot pre sume 5 tha t t heydo .”) ; U nit ed Sta tes v. Wo lf, 89 0 F .2d24 1, 245 6 (10 th Cir . 1 989 ) ( “[T ]he Ni nthci rcu it cle arl y s tat ed tha t 7 to vio lat e 1 8 U .S. C. § 2 251 th e p hot ogr aph er nee d n ot 8 por tra y t he vic tim ize d c hil d a s ate mpt res s. We ag ree wi th 9 the Ni nthCi rcu it’ s i nte rpr eta tio n o f t he sta tut ory 10 lan gua ge. ”); Hi ll, 32 2 F . S upp . 2 d a t 1 086 (“ Alm ostan y 11 fac ial expre ssi on- -orla ck the reo f-- cou ld fai rlybe 12 des cri bedas on e o f t hes e. . . . No t muchhe lp her e.” ). Of 13 cou rse anin noc entch ildca n b e c oax ed to ass ume po ses or 14 exp res sio ns tha t b esp eakse xua l a vai lab ili ty whe n v iew ed by 15 cer tai n a dul ts, re sul tin g i n a n i mag e t hat“s ugg est s s exu al 16 coy nes s o r awi lli ngn ess toen gag e i n s exu al act ivi ty” 17 reg ard les s o f t he chi ld’ s o wn cha rac ter ist ics . 18 The si xthDo st fac torha s a lsobe en cri tic ize d. It 19 ask s “ whe the r t he vis ual de pic tio n i s i nte nde d o r d esi gne d 20 to eli cita sex ual re spo nse inth e v iew er. ” Dos t, 636 F. 21 Sup p. at 832 . See , e .g. , D oe v. Chambe rli n, 299 F. 3d 192 , 22 196 (3 d C ir. 20 02) (“ The fi nal Do st fac torsi mpl y p uts ag ain17 1 the un der lyi ng que sti on: Is th e e xhi bit ionla sci vio us? ”); 2 Hil l, 322 F. Su pp. 2dat10 86 (“T his fa cto r h as no 3 ind epe nde nt for ce. ”). T he Fir st Cir cui t h as lab ele d i t “ the 4 mos t c onf usi ng andco nte nti ous ofth e D ostfa cto rs, ” 5 sug ges tin g t hatitin vit es mor e ques tio ns tha n i t a nsw ers : 6 Is thi s asu bje cti ve or obj ect ive st and ard , 7 andsh oul d w e b e e val uat ingth e r esp ons e o f a n 8 ave rag e v iew er or the sp eci ficde fen dan t i n 9 thi s c ase ? Mor eov er, is th e i nte nt to eli cit 10 a s exu al res pon se ana lyz ed fro m t he 11 per spe cti ve of the ph oto gra ph’ s c omp osi tio n, 12 or fro m e xtr ins ic evi den ce (su ch as whe re the 13 pho tog rap h w as obt ain ed, wh o t he pho tog rap her 14 was , e tc. )? 15 16 Uni tedSt ate s v . Amir aul t, 173 F. 3d 28, 34 (1 st Cir . 1 999 ). 17 Aft er all , i f t he six th fac torwe re to foc us on the 18 def end ant ’s “su bje cti ve rea cti on” toth e p hot ogr aph , a s 19 opp ose d t o t he pho tog rap h’s “i nte nde d e ffe ct, ” “ a s exu al 20 dev ian t’s qu irk s c oul d t urna Sea rs cat alo g i nto 21 por nog rap hy. ” Id. ; s ee als o W ieg and , 8 12 F.2 d a t 1 245 22 (“P riv atefa nta sie s a re notwi thi n t he sta tut e’s ambit .”) . 23 The Fi rstCi rcu it has fu rth er que sti one d whet herth e i nqu iry 24 sho uldbeli mit ed to “th e f ourco rne rs of the im age ” o r 25 ext endtoev ide nceofth e s exu al exp loi tat ionin vol vedin 26 mak ingth e i mag e. Fr abi zio , 4 59 F.3 d a t 8 9-9 0; see al so 27 Ami rau lt, 17 3 F .3dat34 (e xpr ess ingdo ubtth at a f act

-18 1 fin dersh oul d c ons ide r “ the co nte xt sur rou ndi ng the cr eat ion 2 andac qui sit ionofth e p hot ogr aph ”). 3 The Th irdCi rcu it has re sol vedth e o bje cti on as 4 fol low s: 5 We mus t . . . l ookatth e p hot ogr aph , r ath er 6 tha n t he vie wer . If we wer e t o c onc lud e t hat 7 the ph oto gra phs we re las civ iou s mere ly bec aus e 8 [th e d efe nda nt] fo undth em sex ual ly aro usi ng, 9 we wou ld be eng agi ng in con clu sor y 10 boo tst rap pin g r ath er tha n t he tas k a t h and --a 11 leg al ana lys is of the su ffi cie ncyofth e 12 evi den ce of las civ iou sne ss. 13 14 Vil lar d, 885 F. 2d at 125 . So, toth at cou rt, “r ath er tha n 15 bei ng a s epa rat e s ubs tan tiv e i nqu iryab outth e p hot ogr aph s,” 16 the si xthDo st fac tor“i s u sef ul as ano the r w ay of inquir ing 17 int o whet heran y o f t he oth er fiv e D ostfa cto rs are me t.” 18 Id. 19 Some o f t his cr iti cis m i s m iti gat ed onc e o ne 20 dis tin gui she s b etw eenth e p roduct ionofch ildpo rno gra phy 21 andpo sse ssi on. I n D ost , t he def end ant s w ere ch arg ed wit h 22 hav ingpr odu cedch ildpo rno gra phy . It was th us log ica l f or 23 the Ni nthCi rcu it to hol d t hatth e p ict ure s w ere “a 24 las civ iou s e xhi bit ionbe cau se the ph oto gra phe r a rra yeditto 25 sui t h is pec uli ar lus t.” W ieg and , 8 12 F.2 d a t 1 244 . It is 26 a p oin t o f d ist inc tio n t hatth e d efe nda nts inAm ira ult , 27 Vil lar d a nd Fra biz io wer e c har gedwi th hav ingpo sse sse d ( or19 1 tra nsp ort ed) ch ildpo rno gra phy ; t her e w as no all ega tio n t hat 2 the y l oca tedth e v ict ims , a rra nge d o r p ose d t he sce nes , o r 3 oth erw isepr odu cedth e v isu al dep ict ion . The si xthDo st 4 fac toris no t e asi ly ada pte d t o apo sse ssi on cas e. 5 Sim ila rly , t he Dos t f act ors ar e a rgu abl y o f d imi nis hed 6 uti lit y f or pur pos es of Fou rthAmendmen t a nal ysi s. Se e 7 Hil l, 322 F. Su pp. 2dat10 86- 87 (advoc ati ng forte st 8 dic tat ingth at “[i ]f an ima ge of a m ino r d isp lay s t he 9 min or’ s n ake d g eni tal ar ea, th ere is pr oba ble ca use to 10 bel iev e t hatth e i mag e i s l asc ivi ous un les s t her e a re str ong 11 ind ica tor s t hatitis no t l asc ivi ous ” ( foo tno te andempha sis 12 omi tte d)) . Tha t c onc ernis no t i mpl ica tedhe re. 13 Not wit hst and ingva lidcr iti cis ms andca uti ons ab outth e 14 Dos t f act ors , w e s ee no err or in the ju ry cha rge gi venby 15 the Di str ictCo urt . 16 Con gre ss cho se the wo rd “la sci vio us, ” whic h h as to do 17 gen era llywi th sex ual ar ous al. A lth oug h t he sta tut e i s n ot 18 unc ons tit uti ona llyva gue , s ee Uni tedSt ate s v . X -Ci tement 19 Vid eo, In c., 51 3 U .S. 64 , 7 8-7 9 ( 199 4); Un ite d S tat es v. 20 Fre ema n, 808 F. 2d 129 0, 129 2 ( 8thCi r. 198 7), ju ror s ( and 21 jud ges ) n eedne utr al ref ere nce s a nd con sid era tio ns to avo id 22 dec isi ons ba sedonin div idu al val ues orth e r evu lsi on20 1 pot ent ial ly rai sedina chi ld por nog rap hy pro sec uti on. A s a 2 def ini tio n o f t he wor d “ las civ iou s,” th e D ostfa cto rs are 3 imp erf ectan d vuln era ble tocr iti cis m. Bu t t heyar e n ot 4 def ini tio nal --n or do the y p urp orttobe . Dos t r eco mme nds 5 tha t “ thetr ieroffa ct sho uldlo ok to” th e s ix enumer ate d 6 fac tor s, butno tedth at “ot her s . . . m ay be rel eva nt in the 7 par tic ula r c ase .” Do st, 63 6 F . S upp . a t 8 32. And her e, 8 Jud ge Kra vit z s aidth at the ju ry “sh oul d c ons ide r” the 9 fac tor s-- notth at thefa cto rs det erm ine th e ques tio n. Th ey 10 are no t mand ato ry, fo rmu lai c o r e xcl usi ve. A s f act ors , t hey 11 mit iga te theri sk tha t j uro rs wil l r eac t t o r aw ima ges ina 12 vis cer al way , r elyonimpul se or revuls ion , o r l ackan y 13 framew orkfo r r eas one d d ial ogu e i n t he jur y r oom . In sho rt, 14 the Do st fac tor s i mpo se use ful di sci pli ne on the ju ry’ s 15 del ibe rat ion s. Th ey maydosoimper fec tly , b ut the y h ave 16 notbe en muc h i mpr ove d u pon . 17 We nee d n ot dec ide wh eth er the Do st fac tor s w oul d 18 gov erninev eryca se tha t t ouc hes onch ildpo rno gra phy . 19 Amo ng oth er thi ngs , i t m att ers wh eth er pro duc tio n o r 20 pos ses sio n i s t he cha rge . Butitis noer rorfo r adi str ict 21 cou rt to rec ommendth e D ostfa cto rs as con sid era tio ns, 22 mak ingan y a dap tat ion s o r a llo wan ces wa rra nte d b y t he fac ts21 1 andch arg es in a p art icu larca se. T hatsa id, th e j ury 2 sho uldno t b e madetore ly on the Do st fac tor s w ith 3 pre cis iontore acha mat hem ati cal re sul t, or to wei gh or 4 cou nt the m, or to rel y o n t hemex clu siv ely . 5 6 II 7 Riv eraar gue s t hatth e D ist ric t C our t e rre d i n d eny ing 8 his mo tio n t o s eve r c oun ts two(e nti cementofBr ian ) a nd 9 thr ee (in ter sta te tra vel re lat ingtoBr ian ) f romco unt s o ne 10 (en tic eme nt of Gar ret t), fo ur (pr odu cti on of chi ld 11 por nog rap hy dep ict ingDa vid ) a nd fiv e ( pos ses sio n o f c hil d 12 por nog rap hy) . Riv eraco nte nds th at joi nde r o f t hes e f ive 13 cha rge s w as imp rop er und er Fed era l Rule ofCr imi nal 14 Pro cedure8( a), orinth e a lte rna tiv e, tha t t he Dis tri ct 15 Cou rt abu sedit s d isc ret ioninde cli nin g t o s eve r t he 16 cha rge s u nde r Rule14 (a) . 17 “Ou r s cru tin y o f t he dis tri ct cou rt’ s d eni al of a Rule 18 8 m oti on to sev er requir es a t wof oldin qui ry: wh eth er 19 joi nde r o f t he cou nts wa s p rop er, an d i f n ot, wh eth er 20 mis joi nde r w as pre jud ici al to the de fen dan t.” U nit ed Sta tes 21 v. Rui z, 894 F. 2d 501 , 5 05 (2dCi r. 199 0). Rule 8( a) all ows 22 forth e j oin derofof fen ses th at “ar e o f t he same o r s imi lar22 1 cha rac ter , o r a re bas ed on the same actortr ans act ion , o r 2 are co nne cte d w ithorco nst itu te par ts of a c omm on sch emeor 3 pla n.” F ed. R. Cr im. P. 8( a). “ Sim ila r” cha rge s i ncl ude 4 tho se tha t a re “so mewhatal ike ,” or tho se “ha vin g age ner al 5 lik ene ss” toea ch oth er. U nit ed Sta tes v. We rne r, 620 F. 2d 6 922 , 9 26 (2dCi r. 198 0) (qu oti ng the di cti ona ry) . Cou nts 7 tha t h avea “su ffi cie nt log ica l c onn ect ion ” t o e achot her 8 canbe tr iedto get her , Ruiz , 8 94 F.2 d a t 5 05, as ca n t hos e 9 “wh ere th e s ameev ide nce ma y b e u sedtopr ove ea ch cou nt, ” 10 Uni tedSt ate s v . B lak ney , 9 41 F.2 d 1 14, 11 6 ( 2d Cir . 1 991 ). 11 Fed era l Rule ofCr imi nal Pr oce dur e 1 4(a ) p rov ide s t hat 12 “[i ]f thejo ind er of off ens es or def end ant s i n a n 13 ind ict men t, an inf ormati on, ora con sol ida tio n f or tri al 14 app ear s t o p rej udi ce a d efe nda nt or the go ver nme nt, th e 15 cou rt mayor derse par ate tr ial s o f c oun ts, se verth e 16 def end ant s’ tri als , o r p rov ide an y o the r r eli ef tha t j ust ice 17 requir es. ” Fed . R . C rim . P . 1 4(a ). We re vie w t he den ial of 18 a m oti on und er thi s r ule fo r a bus e o f d isc ret ion , a nd do not 19 rev ers e “ unl ess th e d efe nda nt dem ons tra tes th at the fa ilu re 20 to sev er cau sedhi m ‘ sub sta nti al pre jud ice ’ i n t he form o f a 21 ‘mi sca rri ageofju sti ce. ’” Un ite d S tat es v. Sampso n, 385 22 F.3 d 1 83, 19 0 ( 2d Cir . 2 004 ) ( quo tin g B lak ney , 9 41 F.2 d a t23 1 116 ) ( oth er int ern al quo tat ion s o mit ted ). 2 The jo ind er was pr ope r. Co unt s o ne, tw o, thr ee and 3 fou r s har e a“g ene ral li ken ess ” i n t erm s o f t he con duc t a nd 4 eve nts al leg ed: ov er a f our -mo nthpe rio d, Riv erata rge ted 5 Bri an, Ga rre tt, Mi cha el, Da vidinIn ter netch at roo ms; 6 exc han gedse xua llyexpli citme ssa ges an d p hot ogr aph s w ith 7 the m; anden tic ed the m t o meetfo r i lli citse xua l 8 enc oun ter s. Du rin g o ne of tho se enc oun ter s, Riv erato ok the 9 pho tog rap hs tha t f ormth e b asi s o f c oun t f our . Andso me of 10 the same exh ibi ts wer e u sedtopr ove co unt s o ne, tw o a nd 11 thr ee: th e d oss ier s R ive ra mai nta ine d o f h is sex ual 12 exp eri enc es, wh ichli ste d G arr ettan d B ria n; andth e 13 tra nsc rip t o f a n I nte rne t c hatinwh ichRi ver a s aidth at he 14 hadab use d f ivebo ys, in clu din g G arr ettan d B ria n. As to 15 cou nt fiv e ( pos ses sio n o f c hil d p orn ogr aph y), we ag ree wi th 16 the El eve nthCi rcu it tha t “ chi ld mol est ati on andch ild 17 por nog rap hy . . . pla inl y r epr ese nt act s o f ‘ sim ila r 18 cha rac ter ’ i nvo lvi ng the ex tra ord ina ry mis tre atmentof 19 chi ldr en. ” Uni tedSt ate s v . H ers h, 297 F. 3d 123 3, 124 2 20 (11 th Cir . 2 002 ). Ac cor din gly , t he fiv e c oun ts wer e 21 pro per ly joi ned . 22 Riv erafa ils tode mon str ate th at he suf fer ed pre jud iceInth e D ist ric t C our t, Riv eraas ser tedth at joi nde r 5 wou ld pre jud icehi s r igh t t o t est ifyonce rta in cou nts bu t notonot her s. A-1 8 . He has fo rfe ite d t hatar gumenton app eal , r ely ingin ste ad on the br oad er con cer n e xpr ess ed in Uni tedSt ate s v . W ern er, 62 0 F .2d92 2 ( 2d Cir . 1 980 ), tha t “th e j uryma y u se theev ide nce cumul ati vel y; tha t i s, tha t alt hou gh so muc h a s w oul d b e a dmi ssi ble up on anyon e o f t he cha rge s m igh t n ot hav e p ers uad ed the m o f t he acc use d’s gui lt, th e s um of it wil l c onv inc e t hemas toal l.” I d. at 929 (quot ingUn ite d S tat es v. Lot sch , 1 02 F.2 d 3 5, 36 (2d Cir . 1 939 ) ( Lea rne d H and , J .). 24 1 fro m t he joi nde r. Ri ver a p osi ts a p rej udi cia l “ spi llo ver ” 2 bec aus e t he gov ernmen t i ntr odu cedev ide nce th at Riv eraha d 3 iss uedth rea ts to some o f h is vic tim s a nd sug ges ted(i n 4 summat ion ) t hatRi ver a’s ph oto gra phs ofDa vidwe re 5 las civ iou s due to Riv era ’s gen era l p rur ien t i nte res t i n 6 you ng mal es. R ive ra con ten ds tha t, in den yin g h is mot ion , 7 the Di str ictCo urtov erl ook ed the li kel iho od tha t t he jur y 8 wou ld be “pr ofo und ly inf lue nce d . . . b y t he cumula tiv e 9 eff ectofev ide ncere lat ingtodi sti nctof fen ses init s 10 ass ess men t o f whet herth e g ove rnmentha d met its bu rde n o f 11 pro of on anyon e c har ge. ” Blue 1 8 . 5 12 Thi s g ene ral ize d c lai m o f p rej udi ce is ins uff ici ent . 13 The Di str ictCo urtin str uct ed the ju ry to “co nsi derea ch 14 cou nt sep ara tel y a nd ret urna sep ara te ver dic t o f g uil ty or 15 notgu ilt y f or eac h” of the m, A-5 1 , a nd tha t i ts ver dic t 16 “mu st be una nim ous as toea ch cha rge ,” A-8 4 . Mor e25 1 par tic ula rly , F ede ral Ru le of Evi den ce 414 pr ovi des th at 2 “[i ]n a c rim ina l c aseinwh ichth e d efe nda nt is acc use d o f 3 an off ens e o f c hil d m ole sta tio n, evi den ce of the de fen dan t’s 4 commis sio n o f a not herof fen se or off ens es of chi ld 5 mol est ati on is adm iss ibl e, andma y b e c ons ide redfo r i ts 6 bea rin g o n a ny mat tertowh ichitis re lev ant .” Fe d. R. 7 Evi d. 414 (a) . Thesame rul e d efi nes “c hil d” as a p ers on 8 bel ow theag e o f f our tee n. Id . 4 14( d). A s aco nse que nce , 9 pro of as to cou nts tw o a nd thr ee (re lat ingtoBr ian , a ge 10 thi rte en) wo uldli kel y h ave be en adm iss ibl e a s t o t he thr ee 11 oth er cou nts . TheFe der al Rul es of Evi den ce thu s 12 spe cif ica llysa nct ionth e k indofsh owi ng tha t R ive ra say s 13 is imp erm iss ibl e a nd con duc ive tosp ill ove r. Th e D ist ric t 14 Cou rt didno t v iol ateRu le 8(a ) a nd didno t a bus e i ts 15 dis cre tio n u nde r Rule14 (a) . 16 17 III 18 Riv erach all eng es his se nte nce as cr uel an d u nus ual , i n 19 vio lat ionofth e E igh th Ame ndment . Sin ce Riv erafa ile d t o 20 rai se thi s c lai m i n t he Dis tri ct Cou rt, we de em it 21 for fei ted . Uni tedSt ate s v . F eli cia no, 22 3 F .3d10 2, 125 22 (2dCi r. 200 0) (“T her e i s n o r eas on why[t he def end ant ’s]26 1 con sti tut ion al cha lle nge s c oul d n ot hav e b eenra ise d b elo w, 2 whe re he hadampleop por tun itytora ise th em andwh ere th e 3 dis tri ct cou rt wou ld hav e h ad the op por tun itytoad dre ss 4 the m.” ). 5 In anyev ent , R ive ra’ s f orf eit ed con sti tut ion al cla im 6 is wit hou t meri t. “T he Eig hthAmendmen t ‘ for bid s o nly 7 ext reme s ent enc es tha t a re “gr oss ly dis pro por tio nat e” to the 8 cri me. ’” Un ite d S tat es v. You sef , 3 27 F.3 d 5 6, 163 (2 d C ir. 9 200 3) (qu oti ng Harmel in v. Mic hig an, 50 1 U .S. 95 7, 100 1 10 (19 91) (K enn edy , J ., con cur rin g i n p artan d c onc urr ingin 11 the ju dgment )). “ [O] uts ide th e c ont extofca pit al 12 pun ishmen t, suc ces sfu l c hal len ges toth e p rop ort ion ali ty of 13 par tic ula r s ent enc es hav e b eenex cee din glyra re. ” Ewi ng v. 14 Cal ifo rni a, 538 U. S. 11, 21 (2 003 ) ( int ern al quo tat ion s 15 omi tte d) (re jec tin g E igh th Ame ndmentch all eng e t o 2 5-y ear 16 sen ten ce forth eftofgo lf clu bs wor th $1, 200 ). Af ter 17 Riv erase rve d ast atese nte nce fo r m ole sti ng his ni ece an d 18 nep hewth rou gho ut the ir chi ldh ood , h e s exu all y e xpl oit ed 19 fou r a dol esc entbo ys, on e o f t hemon ly thi rte en yea rs old . 20 In lig ht of thegr avi ty of Riv era ’s off ens es andhi s 21 rec idi vis t n atu re, weca nno t d raw“a n i nfe ren ce of gro ss 22 dis pro por tio nal ity ” f romth e m and ato ry lif e s ent enc e a t27 1 iss ue her e. Ha rme lin , 5 01 U.S . a t 1 005 (K enn edy , J ., 2 con cur rin g). 3 Las tly , R ive ra’ s S ixt h Amen dme nt cha lle nge tohi s 4 sen ten ce is def eat ed by Almend are z-T orr es v. Uni tedSt ate s, 5 523 U. S. 224 (1 998 ). 6 7 CONCLUSION 8 Forth e f ore goi ng rea son s, we aff irm .