Opinion ID: 76338
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: U.S.S.G. Sections 2A3.2 and 2A3.4

Text: 135 On appeal, the government argues that the district court erroneously determined Miranda's base offense level under U.S.S.G. § 2A3.4, the guideline for sexual contact. According to the government, the district court should have sentenced Miranda pursuant to the harsher penalties contained in § 2A3.2 because Miranda's conduct consisted of an attempt to have sex with latinaprincezz13 and claudia13x. The government emphasizes that there is no way to read the e-mail dialogue at issue in this case other than as an attempt by Defendant Miranda to have sex with individuals whom he believed to be two young girls. The government also stresses the fact that Defendant Miranda actually showed up at the Kenwood Elementary School within an hour of concluding his conversation with claudia13x. 9 We agree. U.S.S.G. § 2A3.2 136 As stated above, whether Miranda should have been sentenced under § 2A3.2 is dependent upon the definition of sexual act. The Guidelines' definition of sexual act is important because § 2A3.2 applies to offenses involving the criminal sexual abuse of an individual who had not attained the age of 16 years. U.S.S.G. § 2A3.2, cmt. background (emphasis added). The term sexual abuse includes offenses that involve a sexual act. See 18 U.S.C. § 2241, et seq. 137 Looking at the definition of a sexual act, it is impossible to conclude anything but that Miranda's conduct constituted an attempted sexual act with latinaprincezz13 and claudia13x. Even the most cursory view of the record reveals reliable and specific evidence of Miranda's conduct amounting to an attempted sexual act with latinaprincezz13 and claudia13x. See United States v. Lawrence, 47 F.3d 1559, 1566-67 (11th Cir.1995). 138 With latinaprincezz13, Miranda discussed menstrual cycles and pregnancy protection. He also point-blank asked her Do you [latinaprincezz13] want to have sex? Although the two of them could not agree on a mutually convenient meeting time or place, the tenor of the conversation and the content of Miranda's questions are reliable and specific evidence of Miranda's conduct consisting of an attempted sexual act with latinaprincezz13. 139 Miranda's conversations with claudia13x are even more conclusive. Their online discussions included references to her menstrual cycle, protection against pregnancy, and the use of condoms. Furthermore, Miranda specifically asked claudia13x how she wanted him to make love to her and if she kn[e]w any position [she] would like to experiment. In their conversation that concluded less than one hour before they were to meet, Miranda indicated to claudia13x that sex would not hurt and that he would make sure that she did not get pregnant. When claudia13x pressed Miranda for how they could make sure she did not get pregnant, he responded, We can use condom [sic]. 140 Here, the district court concluded that she was not prepared to say that based on [her] own experience as a human being that a person who talks a lot of sex-talks a lot about sex is necessarily going to act on it. Such personal experience is irrelevant to the case at hand because the evidence in this case supports only one conclusion: Miranda's conduct consisted of an attempted sexual act with whom he believed were two young girls. While the district court's personal experience with the average human being may be correct, Miranda is not an average human being. Miranda is a middle-aged man who conversed extensively with whom he believed to be twelve- and fourteen-year-old girls and asked them to have sex with him. The only reasonable construction of Miranda's words to both latinaprincezz13 and claudia13x is that he wanted to have sexual intercourse with them, and, therefore, Miranda's conduct consisted of an attempted sexual act. No district court faced with this record could correctly conclude otherwise. 10 141 In United States v. Panfil, 338 F.3d 1299 (11th Cir.2003), this Court addressed the application of § 2A3.2 to another child predator case. 11 In Panfil, a Special Agent with the United States Secret Service logged onto the Yahoo! Internet Chat room under the screen name Hialeahnina13. Id. at 1299-300. Brian Panfil logged in under the name Freeoralslave, and contacted Hialeahnina13. Id. at 1300. After Hialeahnina13 identified herself as a 13-year-old female, Panfil initiated a sexually explicit Internet conversation. Id. Specifically, Panfil offered to perform oral sex, informing Hialeahnina13 that oral sex would relax you and make u feel good. Id. After Panfil and Hialeahnina13 agreed to meet the next evening at 10:00 p.m., Panfil encouraged Hialeahnina13 to sleep well, telling her you will have some powerful orgasms tomorrow. Id. 142 The next day, Panfil contacted Hialeahnina13 to confirm the meeting time and place. Panfil, 338 F.3d at 1300. However, when Panfil arrived at the pre-determined meeting location, he was immediately arrested and subsequently pled guilty to violating 18 U.S.C. § 2422(b). Id. 143 In interpreting Panfil's conduct under the same definition of a sexual act we are faced with here, the Panfil Court easily concluded that Panfil's actions constituted an attempted sexual act. In the present case, there is significantly more evidence showing Miranda's conduct, and we readily conclude that Miranda should have been sentenced under § 2A3.2 (Attempted Sexual Abuse). U.S.S.G. § 2A3.4 144 Having concluded that § 2A3.2 (Attempted Sexual Abuse) applies to Miranda's conduct, we address § 2A3.4 (Attempted Sexual Contact) in order to determine whether § 2A3.4's plain language could apply to Miranda's case and, thereby, present the district court with a conflict. See Panfil, 338 F.3d at 1303. Section 2A3.4 applies to offenses constituting  sexual contact not amounting to criminal sexual abuse. U.S.S.G. § 2A3.4, cmt. background (emphasis added). 145 Section 2A3.4 defines sexual contact in the negative and excludes any conduct that constitutes a sexual act. Panfil, 338 F.3d at 1303. Because we have already determined that Miranda's conduct constituted an attempted sexual act and § 2A3.4 excludes any conduct that is a `sexual act,' we do not find any language in § 2A3.4 that would place it in conflict with § 2A3.2. Id. (footnote omitted). Because Miranda's conduct consisted of an attempted sexual act with latinaprincezz13 and claudia13x, the district court erroneously applied U.S.S.G. § 2A3.4. Consequently, we vacate Miranda's sentence and remand this case to the district court so that Miranda may be resentenced under § 2A3.2. 146