Opinion ID: 2805452
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Sexual Contact Enhancement

Text: Lastly, Warner argues that the district court improperly applied a two-level enhancement for “sexual contact” to his Sentencing Guidelines range for Count 1. We 7 review the district court’s factual findings supporting the sentencing enhancement for clear error. United States v. Grier, 475 F.3d 556, 570 (3d Cir. 2007) (en banc). The Sentencing Guidelines provide that “[i]f the offense involved . . . the commission of a sexual act or sexual contact, increase by 2 levels.” U.S.S.G. § 2G2.1(b)(2)(A); see also U.S.S.G. § 2G2.1(b)(2)(A) application n.2 (2014) (stating “‘[s]exual contact’ has the same meaning given that term in 18 U.S.C. § 2246(3)”). Section 2246(3) defines sexual contact as “the intentional touching, either directly or through the clothing, of the genitalia, anus, groin, breast, inner thigh, or buttocks of any person with an intent to abuse, humiliate, harass, degrade, or arouse to gratify the sexual desire of any person.” 18 U.S.C. § 2246(3) (2012). The district court “found that ‘two images’ depict the child touching her groin area . . . [and] that these images meet [the ‘sexual contact’] definition. App. 668. Accordingly, we affirm the district court because the court accurately found that the images supported the two-level sentencing enhancement.