United States v. Acevedo-Maldonado
696 F.3d 150
1st Cir.2012Background
- Acevedo-Maldonado was convicted of producing a visual depiction of a minor engaged in explicit conduct, based on materials transported in interstate or foreign commerce.
- Evidence at trial included expert testimony from Cen and Lang about the origins of the hard drive and webcam, allegedly showing foreign manufacturing.
- Acevedo did not object contemporaneously to Cen’s or Lang’s testimony about origins and did not cross-examine Lang on the basis for his opinion.
- Acevedo moved for judgment of acquittal under Rule 29, arguing the interstate-commerce element rested on hearsay from labels; the district court denied the motion and later analyzed the Crawford issue.
- The district court ultimately instructed that the evidence could support the jurisdictional element based on expert testimony and the labels, and the jury convicted Acevedo.
- On appeal, Acevedo argues the testimony violated the Confrontation Clause and that labels on the hardware were inadmissible hearsay; the First Circuit reviews for plain error.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Confrontation Clause plain error | Acevedo | Acevedo | No plain error; trial evidence sufficient to prove jurisdictional element |
| Sufficiency of jurisdictional proof without Crawford objection | Acevedo | Acevedo | Lang's expert testimony alone supported jurisdictional element; conviction affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Poulin, 631 F.3d 17 (1st Cir. 2011) (facts viewed in light most favorable to the verdict)
- Rodríguez, 525 F.3d 85 (1st Cir. 2008) (confrontation clause plain error standard)
- Luciano, 414 F.3d 174 (1st Cir. 2005) (plain error review for unpreserved Crawford issues)
- Olano, 507 U.S. 725 (Sup. Ct. 1993) (striped standard for plain error analysis)
- Johnson, 520 U.S. 461 (Sup. Ct. 1997) (plain-error review framework; substantial rights)
- Borrero-Acevedo, 533 F.3d 11 (1st Cir. 2008) (prejudice in plain-error review analogous to harmless error)
- Martínez-Medina, 279 F.3d 105 (1st Cir. 2001) (concession on drug quantity fatal to hearsay claims)
- Vázquez-Rivera, 665 F.3d 351 (1st Cir. 2011) (burden of persuasion in prejudice inquiry in plain-error context)