# U ni te d S ta te s Co ur t of A pp ea ls

For the Eig hth Circu it

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _

No. 1 6- 14 04

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _

Uni te d S ta te s o f Am eri ca

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Pla in ti

ff - App el le e

v.

Jo sh ua James Bae te n

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Defe nd

an t - Ap pe ll an t

__ __ __ __ __ __
App eal fro m

Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co ur t fo r th e Dis tri ct of M in ne so ta - St. Pa ul

__ __ __ __ __ __

Su bm it te d: Feb ru ary 6, 2 01 7
Fil ed : J un e 2 2, 2 01 7 [Un pu bl is he d]

__ __ __ __ __ __

Befo re LOKEN, COLLO TON, and KELLY , Cir cu it Ju dg es

.

__ __ __ __ __ __

PER CURI AM.

Jo sh ua Bae te n en ga ge d in on li ne co rres po nd en ce wit h so m eo ne he be li ev ed to

be an 11 -y ear- ol d gi rl. Dur in g th ei r co nv ers a t i o n s , B aet en to ld he r he li ke d y ou ng gi rls

, se nt he r po rn og rap hi c im ag es , an d as ke d he r “ ho w m uc h se xu al ex pe rie nc e” sh e

ha d. Ult im at el y , Bae te n m ai le d th e gi rl a web cam wit h th e ex pe ct at io n th at he co ul d

watc h as sh e an d he r 13 -y ear- ol d si st er “ m es se d aro un d.” As it tu rn ed ou t, th ere wasno 11 -y ear- ol d gi r l

. B a e te n ha d be en co m m un ic at in g wit h an un de rco ve r ag en t

po si ng as a m in or

. Afte r Bae te n m ai le d t h e w e b c am , it was se iz ed by la w

en fo rcem en t, who th en ex ecu te d a se arch warra nt at Bae te n’s ho m e. The re, of fic ers

fo un d ov er 60 0 im ag es of ch il d po rn og rap hy on va rio us el ect ro ni c d ev ic es

. Bae te n pl ead ed gu il ty, pu rs ua nt to an In fo rm at io n, to on e co un t of co erci on an d en ti cem en t

of a m in or to en ga ge in se xu al act iv it y in vi ol at io n of 18 U.S.C. § 24 22 (b )
(“ W ho ev er, us in g th e m ai l or an y faci li ty or m ean s of in te rs ta te or fo rei gn co m m erce

. . . kn owi ng ly pe rs ua de s, in du ces , en ti ces , or c o e r c e s a ny in di vi du al who ha s no t

at ta in ed th e ag e of 18 y ears , to en ga ge in pr os ti tu ti on or an y se xu al act iv it y fo r whi ch

an y pe rs on can be ch arg ed wit h a cri m in al of fen se , or at te m

pt s to do so , sh al l be

. . . im pr is on ed no t l es s t ha n 1 0 years o r fo r li fe.”)

.

At se nt en ci ng , th e di st ric t co ur t im po se d a be lo w-g ui de li ne s se nt en ce of 20 0 1

m on th s’ im

pr i s o n men t, an d a te rm of li fe on su pe rv is ed rel eas e. Bae te n ap pe al s,

arg ui ng th e di st ric t co ur t erre d in co ns id eri ng an i r r e l e v a nt or im pr op er fact or in

vi ol at io n of 18 U.S.C. § 35 53 (a). Th e r e h a s be en so m e co nf us io n in th is ci rcu it

reg ard in g th e pr op er st an da rd of rev ie w to ap pl y in cas es whe re, as he re, th e
de fen d a n t fai le d to co nt em po ran eo us ly ob

ject to th e co ur t’s co ns id erat io n of a

pu rp or te dl y im

pr op er or irr el ev an t fact or

. See Uni te d St at es v. Kou an gv an , 84 4 F.3 d

99 6, 99 9 (8 th Ci r. 20 17 ). Co m pa re Uni te d St at es v. O’ Co n n or , 56 7 F.3 d 39 5, 39 7
(8 th Ci r. 20 09 ) (rev ie win g fo r su bs ta nt iv e reas on ab le ne ss un de r pl ai n- erro r st an da rd )

an d U n i t e d S t a te s v. Bu rn et te

, 51 8 F.3 d 94 2, 94 9 (8 th Ci r. 20 08 ) (rev ie win g fo r

pr oc ed ur al erro r un de r pl ai n- erro r st an da rd ), wit h Uni te d St at es v. Me e s , 6 4 0 F.3 d

84 9, 85 6 (8t h Ci r. 20 11 ) (rev ie win g for su bs ta nt iv e reas on ab le ne ss un de r ab us e-o fdi sc ret io n st an da rd ). Bu t “ [w]e ne ed no t res ol ve th e ap pa r e n t c on fli ct

. . . be cau se [Bae te n] is no t en ti tl ed to rel ie f ev en if we le av e th e he ig ht en ed pl ai n- erro r st an da rd

as id e an d s im

pl y rev ie w for

ab us e o f di sc ret io n.” Kou an gv an , 84 4 F .3d at 9 99

.

The Hon or ab le Jo an N. Eri ck se n, Uni te d St at es Di s t r i c t C o ur t Ju dg e fo r th e 1

Dis tri ct of M in ne so ta

.

-2

-In su pp or t of hi s ap pe al

, Bae te n fo cu s es on on e st at em en t th e di st ric t co ur t

m ad e at se nt en ci ng , whi ch he co ns id ers im pr op er: “ I’m rel uc ta nt to va ry ve ry m uc h

do wnwar d be cau se th e cri m e th at y ou co m m it te d wou ld ha ve , as th e go ve rn m en t sa id

,

cau se d in cal cu la bl e da m ag e [h ad th e un de rco ve r ag en t be en a real ch il d].” Acco rd in g

to Bae te n, he “ sh ou ld ha ve be en se nt en ced fo r wha t he di d, an d no t ba se d up on wha t

wou ld ha ve be en th e da m ag e to a real ch i l d v i c t im .” As an in it ia l m at te r, we no te

th ere ne ed no t be an act ua l m in or vi ct im in vo lv ed to su pp or t a co nv ic ti on fo r at te m pt

un de r § 24 22 (b ). Uni te d Stat es v. Held er, 45 2 F.3 d 75 1, 75 6 (8 th Ci r. 20 06 ) (“ [A]n

act ua l m in or v i c t i m is no t req ui red fo r an at te m pt co nv ic ti on un de r § 24 22 (b ).”).

Bec au se th e at te m

pt po rti on of th e st at ut e do es no t di st in gu is h be twee n act ua l m in or
vi ct im s an d un de rco ve r ag en ts po s i n g a s m in or s, Bae te n was in fact se nt en ced fo r
wha t he d i d

— kn owi ng ly at te m pt in g to en ti ce or co erce a m in or in to en ga gi ng in

se xu al act iv it y

. See id

. at 75 5 (“ The m en s rea req ui rem en t of kn owl ed ge refe rs to th e
de fen da nt ’s su bjec ti ve in te nt —i t is wha t is in th e m in d of th e de fen da nt

. . . . Tha t he

was m is ta ke n i n h is kn owl ed ge is irr el ev an t.” ( qu ot at io ns an d c it at io n o m it te d) ).

The di st ric t co ur t no te d th at Bae te n h a d p rev io us ly be en on th e se x of fen de r

reg is try fo r te n y ea r s , bu t he ha d “ le arn ed th e wro ng th in gs , no t th e rig ht th in gs ,”

m ad e ev id en t b y

hi s re cen t co nd uc t. In th is co nt ex t, the di st ric t co ur t’s co m m en t i s
le gi ti m at el y di rect ed to pe rm is si bl e st at ut or y se nt en ci ng fact or s, in cl ud in g Bae te n’s

hi st or y of co m

m un ic at in g wit h m in or gi rls a bo ut se xu al act iv it y , th e ne ed fo r th e

se nt en ce to refl ect th e se rio us po te nt ia l dan ge r as so ci at ed wit h th is type of co nd uc t,

an d th e ne ed to pr ot ect th e pu bl ic fro m so m eo ne th e co ur t co ns id ered “ a da ng er to th e

co m m un it y .” See 18 U.S.C. § 35 53 (a). The di st ric t co ur t di d no t ab us e it s di sc ret io n

in co ns id eri ng th e po te nt ia l ha rm th at co ul d ha ve res ul te d ha d Bae te n’s of fen se be en

carr ie d ou t wit h an act ua l m in or vi ct im whe n im po si ng a be lo w-g ui de li ne s se nt en ce.

The jud gm en t o f th e d is tri ct co ur t i s af fir m ed

.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __

-3

-