2009 D e c i sion s O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit 7-7-2009 

# U SA v . Mich a el C l ark P r e c e de nt i al or N on-P r e c e de nt i al : N on-P r e c e de nt i al D ocke t N o . 08-1808

F o llow thi s and a dd it ion al work s at : http://d i git alc ommon s .l a w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2009

Thi s de c i sion i s br ou ght t o you for f r e e and ope n a c c e s s b y the O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit at V i ll anova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. It h as be e n a c c ept e d for inclusion in 2009 D e c i sion s b y an authori z e d a dmini s tr at or of V i ll anova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. F or mor e inform at ion, p le as e c ont a ct Be n j amin . C arl s on@l a

w . vi ll anova . e du . Re c omme nde d C it at ion
" U SA v . Mich a el C l ark " (2009). 2009 D e cisio n s . P ape r 1062. http://d i git alc ommon s .l a

w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2009/1062NOT P RE CE DE NT I AL UN I TED STATES CO UR T OF A PP EALS F O R T H E T H IR D C IR C U IT

N o. 08- 1808

UNI TE D ST ATE S OF AM ERI CA

v. M I CH AE L W. CL AR K, A ppel l ant O n A p p ea l from the U n it ed S tat es D istri ct C o u rt f o r th e M id d le D istric t o f P e n n sy lv a n ia ( D . C . C r i m . N o. 1- 07- cr - 00220- 001) D i s tr i ctJ udge: H on. Sy l vi a H . R ambo Subm i t t ed U nderT hi r d C i r cui tL A R 34. 1( a)

J ul y6, 2009 B efor e: SL O V I T E R , A M B R O and J O R D A N , C i r cui tJ udges

( Fi l ed: J ul y7, 2009)

OP I NI ON2

SL O V I T E R , C i r cui tJ udge. M i chae l W . C l ark, w ho ent er ed an ope n gui l typl ea t o the off ens e of r ece i vi ng and d i s tr i b u t i n g c h i l d p o r n o g r a p h y , a p p e a l s h i s s e n t e n c e o f 2 1 0 m o n th s i n c a r c e r a t i o n . We wi l l a f f i r m. I. I n February2007, C l ark us ed an i nt ernets cr een na m e t o cont act“A ngi e, ” an under coverpos t al i ns pect ori dent i fy i ng hi m s el f onl i ne as a thi r ty - tw o- y ear - ol d m otherof tw o y oung daught er s , aged tw el ve and e i ght . C l ark s ent“A ngi e” a tl eas tfi ftyi m ages of ch il d p o rno g rap h y , o ff

ere d h er $ 4 0 0 fo r sex w ith h er a n d h er tw elve -y ea r-old d au g h ter, and s ent$40 t o “A ngi e” s o t hats he w oul d s end nude, s exual l yexpl i ci tphot ogr aphs of h erse lf an d b o th h er d au g h ters t o C lark. A co n tr o ll ed d eli v eryo f p o rno g rap h yto C lark l ed t o hi s arr es t , and a s ubs equents ear ch of hi s r es i dence uncover ed atl eas t1, 000 di gi t al i m ages an d seven tyvideos of suspe ct ed o r know n ch i l d p ornog raphy , as w el l as atl east 750 i m ages of adul t s i nvol ved i n s exual act i vi tyw i th i nfant s and t oddl er s . C l ark w as in d icte d f

o r k n o w in g lya ttem p tin g to p e rsu a d e , ind u c e , en tice , an d c o e rc e a m in o r to engage i n s exual act i vi ty , know i ngl yr ece i vi ng and di s tr i but i ng chi l d pornogr aphy , and know i ngl ypos s es s i ng chi l d pornogr aphy . H e pl eade d gui l tyt o r ece i vi ng and di s tr i but i ng chi l d pornogr aphyi n vi ol at i on of 18 U . S. C . § 2252A ( a) ( 2) i n excha nge forthe di s m i s s al of the rem ai ning cha rges. T he Pr obat i on O ffi ce of the U ni t ed St at es D i s tr i ctC our tforthe M i ddl e D i s tr i ctofC l ark’ s s ent ence w as cal cul at ed under the 2007 ver s i on of 1 the U . S. Sent enci ng G ui del i nes M anual ( “U . S. S. G . ” or “G u idelines ”). C l ark w i thdr ew the obj ect i ons he had i ni t i al l ys ubm i t t ed 2 r el at ed t o hi s G ui del i nes r ange, and li m i t ed hi s obj ect i ons t o the vict i m i m pact s t at em ents . 3 Penns y l vani a pr epar ed a Pr es ent enci ng R eport( “PSR ”) , cal cul at i ng C l ark’ s eff ect i ve se n ten c in g ra n g e to b e 2 1 0 to 2 4 0 m o n th s im p riso n m e n t. T h e P S R a lso in c lu d e d v ictim 1 im p a c t sta tem e n ts re p re se n tin g v ictim s id e n tifie d in tw o o f th e se rie s o f

im a g e s f o u n d in C l ark’ s pos s es s i on. T he names of the vi ct i m s and thei rfami l ym ember s had bee n r edac t ed fr om thes e s t at ement s , and the s t at ement s di d notr efe rt o C l ark’ s pr os ecut i on or se n ten c in g . H o w e v e r, th e “ V ictim Im p a c t” s e c tio n o f th e P S R e x p lain e d th a t: C hi l d pornogr aphyi m ages r ecove r ed fr om the c o m p u ter o f

M ich a e l C lar k w e re a n a ly z e d th ro u g h th e C h ild V i ct i m I dent i fi cat i on Pr ogr am (CV I P) fr om the N at i onal C en ter fo r M issi n g an d E x p loit ed C h il d ren . T h e C V IP rep o rt i dent i fi ed fi fty - ei ghts er i es of chi l d pornogr aphyi m ages on th e d e f e n d a n t’ s c o m p u te r t h a t p o rt ra yk n o w n v ic tim s . . . . Si x vi ct i m s fr om thes e i dent i fi ed s er i es have r eques t ed to b e n o tifie d e a c h tim e th e ir im a g e s a p p e a r in a c h ild pornogr aphypr os ecut i on, and tw o have s ubm i t t ed w r i t t en v ic tim im p a c t s ta te m e n ts . PSR at¶ 18- 19. C l ark obj ect ed t o t he i ncl us i on of the vi ct i m i m pacts t at ement s i n the PSR , ar gui ng th a t th e y“ b e stric k e n f

ro m th e re p o rt a s u n re liab le.” C lar k O b jec tio n to P S R a t 3 . T h is obj ect i on di d notr el at e t o t he ca l cul at i on of C l ark’ s G ui del i nes r ange. T he D i s tr i ct 2 C our trul ed thatthe vi ct i m i m pacts t at ement s w er e pr oper l yi ncl uded i n the PSR andTh e Di s tr i c t Co u r t h a d j u r i s d i c t i o n p u r s u a n tt o 1 8 U. S . C. 3 § 3 2 3 1 , an d w e ha v e j u ri sd ict ion p u rsua n t t o 1 8 U . S . C . § 3 7 4 2 (a). W e conduct“pl enaryr evi ew of ques t i ons of l aw , s uch as 4 the admi s s i bi l i tyof hea r s ays t at ement s , ” and r evi ew the D i s tr i ct C o u rt ’s f a c tu a l f in d in g s f o r c le a r e rr o r. U

nited S tates v. B rothers, 7 5 F . 3 d 8 4 5 , 8 4 8 (3d C ir . 1 9 9 6 ). 4 s ent ence d C l ark t o 210 m onths i m pr i s onm ent , concl udi ng “thata s ent ence atthe l ow end o f th e g u id e lin e ra n g e [ w a s ] s u f f ic ie n t to m e e t s e n te n c in g re q u ir e m e n ts .” A p p . a t 4 3 . T he C our tal s o i m pos ed a l i fet i m e t erm of s upervi s ed r el eas e, a bel ow - gui del i nes fi ne of $1, 500, a s peci al as s es s m entof $100, and r ecomm ended thatC l ark be eva l uat ed fors ex off end er treatm ent. C l ark app eal s. 3 II. C l ark cont ends thatthe D i s tr i ctC our tvi ol at ed hi s pr ocedur al due pr oces s r i ght s by perm i t t i ng the i ncl us i on of the vi ct i m i m pacts t at ement s i n the PSR beca us e the s ta te m e n ts w e re “ u n s u b s ta n tia te d , u n re la te d , ir re le v a n t a n d u n re lia b le ” h e a rs a y . A ppel l ant ’ s B r . at9. W e di s agr ee. 4 Fi r s t , contr aryt o C l ark’ s ar gum entthatthe vi ct i m i m pacts t at ement s ar e notr el at ed t o hi s cas e, the PSR cl ear l yexpl ai ns thatthe s t at ement s conce rn y oung w om en thatthe C V I P i dent i fi ed i n t he s er i es of i m ages found i n C l ark’ s pos s es s i on. O ne s t at ement att ac h ed to C lark’s P S R is from the m o ther o f a y o u n g v ict im d ep ict ed in w h at th e C V IP h a s id e n tifie d a s th e “ Ja n

_ F e b ” se rie s. T h e th re e o th e r sta tem e n ts a re f ro m a v ictim depi ct ed i n the “V i cky ” s er i es , as w el l as herm otherand s t epfa ther . C l ark i s corr ectt hat“[T] he t erm ‘ cr i m e vi ct i m ’ m ea ns a per s on di r ect l yand 5 pr ox i ma t e l yh a r me d a s a r e s u l to f th e c o mmi s s i o n o f

a Fe d e r al o f f e n s e . . . .” 1 8 U .S .C . § 3 7 7 1 (e ). 5 thes e s t at ement s w er e nots peci fi cal l yw r i t t en w i th r efe r ence t o hi s s ent enci ng. N everthel es s , as the pr os ecut ornot ed atthe s ent enci ng hear i ng, thes e s t at ement s ar e “not j us tgener i c - thi s i s notj us ta gene r i c s t at ementfr om s om eone w hos e i m ages w er e not f o u n d a m o n g M r. C lar k ’s.” A p p . at 3 4 . T h e law d o e s n o t re q u ire th a t a v ictim o f c h ild pornogr aphyw r i t e a ne w s t at ementeveryt i m e s om eone i s s ent ence d forpos s es s i ng or d istri b u ti n g a p o rno g rap h ic i m ag e o f h im o r he r. S e c o n d , the in c lu sio n o f th e v ictim im p a c t sta tem e n ts h e re w a s p ro p e r p u rsu a n t to the C r i m e V i ct i m s ’ R i ght s A ct , w hi ch pr ovi des that“[i ] n anycourtpr ocee di ng i nvol vi ng an off ens e aga i ns ta cr i m e vi ct i m , the courts hal l ens ur e thatthe cr i m e vi ct i m i s aff or ded

. . . [t]he ri g h t t o b e re aso n ab lyh ea rd a t anyp u b li c p roc ee d ing in the d istri ct co u rt in v o lv in g . . . se n ten c in g .” 1 8 U .S .C . § § 3 7 7 1 (b ), (a )(4 ); see al so U .S .S .G . § 6 A 1 .5 ( “[T] he courts hal l ens ur e thatthe cr i m e vi ct i m i s aff or ded the r i ght s des cr i bed i n 18 U . S. C . § 3771 and i n anyot herpr ovi s i on of Feder al l aw pert ai ni ng t o the tr eatm entof c rim e v ictim s.” ). M o re o v e r, re d a c tin g th e n a m e s o f th e v ictim s a n d th e ir f

a m ily 5
m e m b e rs w a s a lso c o n sis ten t w ith th e C rim e V ictim s’ R ig h ts A c t, w h ich sp e c if ica lly co d ifi ed the v ict im ’s “righ t t o b e treated w ith fa irn ess a n d w ith resp ec t fo r th e v ict im ’s di gni tyand pr i vacy . ” 18 U . S. C . § 3771( a) ( 8) . C l ark can i dent i fyno author i tyr equi r i ng th a t a v ictim ’s id e n tityb e re v e a led in a v ictim im p a c t sta tem e n t.M or eover , w e n ot e thatthe D i s tr i ctC our ti m pos ed a 6 s ent ence atthe very bot t om of the Sent enci ng G ui del i nes r ange a nd th a t n o th in g in th e re c o rd su g g e sts th a t th e D istric t C o u rt a c tu a lly reli ed o n the v ict im im p ac t st atem en ts i n im p o sing C lark’s s ent ence . 6 T hi r d, the vi ct i m i m pacts t at ement s w er e noti nadmi s s i bl e hea r s ayi n the cont extof a s ent enci ng pr ocee di ng. T he Feder al R ul es of Evi dence do notappl yt o s ent enci ng hear i ngs , Fed. R . E vi d. 1101( d) ( 3) , and “the C onfr ont at i on C l aus e . . . does notpr event the i ntr oduct i on of hea r s ayt es t i m onyata s ent enci ng hear i ng, ” U ni t ed Stat es v. R obi ns on, 482 F. 3d 244, 246 ( 3d C i r . 2007) ( ci t at i ons om i tt ed) . I ns t ead, “[t ] he admi s s i on of hea r s ay st at em ents i n the sent encing co ntexti s subj ectt o the r equ i rem ents of the D ue P rocess C l aus e, ” meani ng that“hea r s ays t at ement s m us thave s om e ‘ m i ni m al i ndi ci um of
r el i abi l i tybey ond m er e al l egat i on. ’ ” I d. ( quot i ng U

nited S tates v. K i kum ura , 918 F. 2d 1 0 8 4 , 1 1 0 2 (3 d C ir. 1 9 9 0 )); see al so U . S. S. G . § 6A 1. 3( a) ( ats ent enci ng, “the courtm ay c o n sid e r re lev a n t in f

o rm a tio n . . . p ro v id e d th a t [ it] h a s s u f f icie n t in d icia o f

re liab ili tyto su p p o rtit s p rob ab le ac cu rac y ”). T he vi ct i m i m pacts t at ement s i n C l ark’ s cas e ea s i l ym eetthi s s t andar d. T he i ndi vi dual s w ho w er e the s ubj ect s of thes e vi ct i m i m pacts t at ement s w er e i dent i fi ed us i ng th e C h ild V ictim Id e n tific a tio n P ro g ra m f ro m th e N a tio n a l C e n ter f o r M iss in g C h ild re n to anal y ze the pornogr aphi c i m ages on C l ark’ s comput er . A s s uch, the vi ct i m i m pact stat em en ts ha d su ff

ici en t i n d ici a o f re li ab il ityto su p p o rttheir i n clus ion in the P S R . C lark has pr ovi ded no evi dence fr om w hi ch w e mi ghtconcl ude otherw i s e. 6III .

Forthe above
- s t at ed r eas ons , w e w i l l aff i r m the j udgm entof convi ct i on and s ent ence .

7