Court Opinion

ID: 9627476
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 08:44:39.510745+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:43:57.683777
License: Public Domain

ALICE M. BATCHELDER, Circuit Judge,
concurring.
I concur in the opinion, although I do not believe the discussion in Section III of the lead opinion is appropriate. I write separately with regard to the lead opinion’s discussion of USSG § 4B1.5(b)(l) and its applicability to the crime of incest. The record’s depiction of Brattain is wholly inconsistent with his argument that § 4B1.5(b)(l) was not intended to apply to individuals such as himself, because his crime was incest, he had only one victim, and, like other persons who commit incest, he presents a low risk of recidivism. Brattain’s attention was not limited to KB, and his interests were not purely incestuous. He admits to having fantasized about having sex with both KB and her sister. He frequented a pornography site that depicted young children engaged in sexual activities, and, according to the PSR, he characterized himself as having “a problem he could not control.” Brattain’s having abused “only” KB may be more a matter of opportunity — or lack thereof — than an indication that he presents a low risk of recidivism. Whatever “compelling arguments” may be made regarding recidivism rates for individuals who commit incest, they are irrelevant here.