United States v. Al-Awadi, 873 F.3d 592

Background

Ali Al‑Awadi, a daycare employee, pulled back a 4‑year‑old child’s underwear during naptime, photographed her genital area several times, then digitally penetrated her; he later deleted the images from his phone.
The child reported pain and identified Al‑Awadi as the toucher; medical exams showed swelling and redness consistent with digital penetration and DNA on the child’s underwear matched Al‑Awadi.
A second superseding indictment charged Al‑Awadi with multiple counts of sexual exploitation of a minor (18 U.S.C. § 2251(a)) and attempted production of child pornography (18 U.S.C. § 2251(e)); the government gave notice to use evidence of the molestation under Rules 404(b) and 414(a).
At trial the defendant admitted taking the photos but claimed a nonsexual motive (checking for injury); intent was the primary contested element. The jury convicted on several counts; several attempt convictions were vacated as lesser‑included offenses. Sentence: concurrent 324 months imprisonment and 15 years supervised release.
Al‑Awadi appealed, raising challenges to a pattern jury instruction ("more likely than not" standard for other‑acts), the admission and volume of molestation evidence (including Rule 403 balancing and timing), admission of a videotaped prior statement, and sufficiency of the evidence that the images were "lascivious."

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Jury instruction applying “more likely than not” to other‑acts evidence	Government: instruction is correct pattern language limited to uncharged acts	Al‑Awadi: wording risked lowering the proof standard for elements (intent) to preponderance	Affirmed — instruction was about uncharged acts; overall instructions required beyond a reasonable doubt for elements, so no plain error
Admission and volume of molestation evidence under Rules 404(b)/414 and relevance to intent	Government: evidence was direct/relevant to intent and admissible under 414; witnesses added distinct probative facts	Al‑Awadi: too many witnesses produced cumulative, prejudicial repetition; Rule 403 balance ignored	Affirmed — district court did not abuse discretion; witnesses provided distinct probative contributions and court performed Rule 403 balancing
Temporal connection and videotaped prior statement admissibility / Confrontation Clause	Government: timing and medical evidence supported link; child testified at trial so prior statement admissible	Al‑Awadi: timing inconsistencies undermine admission; videotaped statement inadmissible after two years	Affirmed — no plain error on timing; Confrontation Clause not violated because child testified and was cross‑examined
Sufficiency: whether photographs showed a "lascivious exhibition" of genitals	Government: photos focused on genital area; defendant’s conduct and prior interest support lascivious intent	Al‑Awadi: images are ambiguous/blurry — cannot prove depicted body part or sexual purpose	Affirmed — sufficient evidence for a reasonable juror to find images of child’s genital area taken to elicit sexual response; convictions stand

Key Cases Cited

United States v. Jaimes‑Jaimes, 406 F.3d 845 (7th Cir.) (waiver requires knowing relinquishment)
United States v. Natale, 719 F.3d 719 (7th Cir.) (discussion of objections to pattern instructions and review)
United States v. Ajayi, 808 F.3d 1113 (7th Cir.) (plain‑error review when counsel says “no objection” in rote colloquy)
United States v. Pust, 798 F.3d 597 (7th Cir.) (review despite routine “no objection” responses)
United States v. Christian, 673 F.3d 702 (7th Cir.) (plain‑error standard for forfeited claims)
United States v. Marr, 760 F.3d 733 (7th Cir.) (pattern instructions presumed accurate)
United States v. Gomez, 763 F.3d 845 (7th Cir.) (distinguishing charged vs. uncharged act instructions)
United States v. Fiedeke, 384 F.3d 407 (7th Cir.) (review of jury instructions as a whole)
United States v. Fifer, 863 F.3d 759 (7th Cir.) (abuse of discretion standard for evidentiary rulings)
United States v. Schrode, 839 F.3d 545 (7th Cir.) (plain‑error review of new evidentiary arguments)
United States v. Loughry, 660 F.3d 965 (7th Cir.) (Rule 403 balancing errors require explanation)
Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36 (U.S.) (Confrontation Clause permits prior testimonial statements if declarant testifies at trial)
United States v. Russell, 662 F.3d 831 (7th Cir.) (definition and analysis of "lascivious exhibition")
United States v. Miller, 829 F.3d 519 (7th Cir.) (more than nudity required for lasciviousness)
United States v. Schuster, 706 F.3d 800 (7th Cir.) (factbound lasciviousness inquiry left to jury)
United States v. Buculei, 262 F.3d 322 (4th Cir.) (statute complete when defendant induced sexually explicit conduct intending a depiction)
United States v. Stokes, 726 F.3d 880 (7th Cir.) (Rule 414 allows similar‑acts evidence on any relevant matter in child‑molestation cases)