FI L ED U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S EL EVENTHCI RCUI T J ANUARY 11, 2012 J OHN L EY CL ERK [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UN ITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELE VENTH CIRCUIT

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ No. 1 1- 12 32 9 Non -Arg um en t Ca le nd ar

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ D.C. Dock etNo. 8 :1 0- cr-0 04 10 -RAL-TGW -1 UNITED STAT ES OF AMERIC A, ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll Pl ai nt iff -Ap pe ll ee, ve rs us TIMOTHY SCOTT BIDW ELL, ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l l Defen da nt -Ap pe ll an t.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ App eal fro m

th e Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co urt forth e Mi dd le Dis tri ctof F lo rid a

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ (J an ua ry 11 , 20 12 ) Befo re BARKETT, PRYOR an d KRAVITC H, Circ ui t Jud ge s. PER CURI AM: Tim ot hy Bidwell ap pe al s h is co nv ic ti on foratt em pt in g t o p ers ua de , in du ce, oren ti ce anin di vi du al un de r 18 y ears of a ge to en ga ge in sex ua l ac ti vi ty by m ean sof

a co m pu te r. Bid well arg ue s t ha t the di st ric t co urt v io la te d h is Fif th an d S ix th Am en dm en t ri gh ts to pre se nta de fen se when itpre cl ud edhi m fro m cal li ng as wit ne ss es adul t wo m enwit h wh om he ha d p rev io us ly hadsex ua l re la ti on s an d pr ecl ud edth e ad m is si on of s ev eral sex ua ll y ex pl ic itex hi bi ts in vo lv in g t he de fen da nten ga gi ng in co ns en su al sex wit h a du ltfem al es . At t ria l, Offi cer Ku rt R om an os ky tes ti fie d t ha t h e rec ei ve d aCri m e St op pe rs ti p abo utanadforanop en -m in de d p ers on wil li ng to sh are t he ir d au gh te r. The ad sa id : L ooking f

or open- minded mom that would like to share her daughter. I

am serious. You be too. Mom can join or watc h. L ooking f or sometime today

or tomorrow. Put willing to share in subject line so Iknow you’re rea l. TTYL . Ro m an os ky repl ie d u si ng anun de rco ve r pr of il e, an d s ta te d t ha t h e was a 37 y ear ol d wh it e fem al e n am edCin dy, w it h t wo d au gh te rs , age s 1 1 a nd14 . After co nv ers in g p rimaril y

ab ou t t he daug ht ers , Bid well an d “ Ci nd y ” ag reedto m eetat 2: 00 p.m . th e fo ll owi ng aft ern oo n. A fem al e d et ect iv e was pl ay in g t he rol e o f

“ Ci nd y ,” an d wh enBid well arri ve d a t t he m eet in g l oc at io n h e was tak enin to cu st od y . Bi dwe ll ’s def

en se at t ria l was th athe was t he type o f pe rs on who wou ldsay ordo an yth in g, i nc lu di ng di sc us si ng sex wit h am in or , to en ti ce anadul t fe m al e to ha ve sex wit h h im . To es tabl is h t ha t h e was su ch a pe rs on , he s ou gh t t o i nt ro du ce , 2in te r a li a , exh ib it s i nc lu di ng a ho m em ad e se x v id eo an d p ho to gr ap hs of g ro up sex

act s wi th anadul t fe m al e, hi s p rio r co nv ic ti on for so li ci ta ti on of p ro st itut io n, h is m ul ti pl e o n- li ne so li ci ta ti on s o f pr os ti tu te s, h is lar ge adul t p orno gr ap hy col le ct io n, an d h is pri oron -li ne so li ci ta ti on s fo r se xu al en co un te rs in vo lv in g a du lt s fo r la wfu l se x a ct s. Th e d is tri ctco urt d ecl in edto adm itth is ev id en ce, an d d ecl in edto all ow hi m to cal l as wit ne ss es adul t fe m al es who he ha d p rev io us ly hadsex ua l re la ti on s wit h b ecau se th e d is tri ctco urt d et erm in edth atth e ev id en ce wo ul d t en d t o c on fu se th e jury. Inad di ti on , th e d is tri ctco urt ad vi se d c ou ns el forBid well th atsu ch a de fen se th eo ry

ha d t he po te nt ia l t o b ack fir e. W e rev ie w forab us e o f di sc ret io n adi st ric t co urt’s ev id en ti ary ru li ng s. Uni te d Sta te s v. To dd , 10 8 F .3d13 29 , 13 31 -3 2 (1 1t h C ir. 1 99 7) . W e rev ie w for ab us e o f di sc ret io n adi st ric t co urt’s d eci si on to gra ntor d en y a ne w tri al in a cri m in al cas e. Uni te d Sta tes v. Ped ri ck , 18 1 F .3d12 64 , 12 66 (11 th Cir . 19 99 ). A de fen da ntha s t he co ns ti tu ti on al rig htun de r th e Fi fth an d S ix th Am en dm en ts to pr es en t a d efen se . Uni te d Sta te s v. Fr az ie r , 38 7 F .3d12 44 , 12 71 (11 th Cir . 20 04 ) ( en ba nc ). Howev er, “ [t]he accu se d d oe s n otha ve anun fet te redrig htto off er te st im on y th atis in co m

pe te nt , pri vi le ge d, o r ot he rwis e in ad m is si bl e u nd er st an da rdrul es of e vi de nc e.” Ta yl or v. Ill in ois , 48 4 U.S. 4 00 , 41 0, 1 08 S.Ct . 64 6, 65 3, 9 8 L.Ed .2d79 8 (1 98 8) . 3Here, Bi dwe ll ’s con st itut io na l ri gh t t o afai r tr ia l was no t v io la te d, an d t he

di st ric t co urt d idno t ab us e it s d is cret io n i n d en y in g B id well ’s m ot io n fo r a n ew tri al . The d is tri ctco urt al lo wedBid well to in tro du ce s ub st an ti al ev id en ce i n supp ort h is de fen se th eo ry , in cl ud in g h is own tes ti m on y ab ou t h is pa stsex ua l be ha vi orin whi ch he rep eat ed ly liedto an d m an ip ul at edwom en . Over t he go ve rn m en t’s o bjec ti on , th e d is tri ctco urt al so all owe d B idwell to in tro du ce se ve ral em ai ls in to ev id en ce t o c orro bo rat e h is tes ti m on y th athe li edto an d m an ip ul at edadul t wo m en . At tri al , Bid well tes ti fie d t ha t wh enhe was o nl in e tryin g t o p ic k up wo m enhe wou ldfig ur e o utwhata wom anwas i nt eres te d i n a nd th enpre te ndto be in te res te d i n t he same thi ng . For e xa m pl e, he res po nd edto an adon Crai gs li stcla im in g t o b e a b od y pi erce r in ord er t o g etth e wom anwho po st edth e adto sl eep wit h h im . Here, he st at edth athe po st edanadst at in g t ha t he was l oo ki ng foran“ op en -m in de d m om ” b ecau se he was l oo ki ng foran un in hi bi te d wo m an , andth athe ha d p rev io us ly been wit h am ot he r an d d au gh te r th atwere o f le ga l ag e. He st at edth atwhen he po st edth e cu rren t ad , he was lo ok in g t o d o t ha t ag ai n. The di stric t co urt d et erm in edth atth e in tro du ct io n o f ad di ti on al em ai ls rel at edto hi s co ns en su al sex ua l re la ti on sh ip s wi th adul t fe m al es an d h is lying an d m an ip ul at io ns as we ll as h is ho m em ad e se x v id eo , andst il l p ho to s o f gr oup s ex , 4wou ldha ve be encu m ul at iv e. Add it io na ll y

su ch ev id en ce wo ul d h av e te nd edto co nf us e th e jury sin ce i t was rel at edto sex ua l co nduc t o th er t ha n tha t wh ic h was ch arg edinth e in di ct m en t. We con cl ud e th atth e d is tri ctco urt d idno t err in ex cl ud in g t hi s ev id en ce, an d t ha t t he di st ric t co urt d idno t ab us e it s d is cret io n i n refu si ng to gra nta ne w tri al on th e sa m e ev id en ti ary gr ou nd s. Bi dwe ll fur th er ar gu es th atth e jud gm en t erro ne ou sl y refl ect s t ha t h e was co nv ic te d o f th e co m

pl et edoff en se in st eadof the att em

pt edoff en se . “ It i s fu nd am en ta l erro r fo r a co urt t o e nt er a ju dg m en t o f co nv ic ti on ag ai ns t a d efen dant who ha s n otbe ench arg ed , tri edor f ou ndgu il ty of th e cri m e rec it edin th e jud gm en t.” Uni te d Sta te s v. Di az , 19 0 F .3d12 47 , 12 52 (11 th Cir . 19 99 ). Ind eed , we m ay “ va cat e th e jud gm en t an d re m an d the cas e to th e d is tri ctco urt fo r en try of a jud gm en t i n a cco rd an ce wi th ” th e jury’ s v erd ic t i f th e err on eo us en try of the jud gm en t i s co ns id ered“ a cl eri cal erro r, an d t he co rrec ti onof t he jud gm en t wo ul d no t p reju di ce t he de fen da ntinan y rev ers ib le way .” Id. The jud gm en t i nc orrect ly refl ect s t ha t Bi dwe ll was c on vi ct edof t he co m pl et edoff en se in st eadof a tt em

pt . The refo re, we rem an d thi s ca se to th e d is tri ctco urt fo r th e li m it edpu rp os e o f co rrec ti ng th e jud gm en t. CONVICT IO N AFFIRMED; J UDGMENT VACATED AND REMANDED FOR LI MIT ED PURPOSE. 5