United States v. Calvin Reid, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 9295

Defendant Calvin Reid (late 40s) had a sexual relationship with J.H., a girl who was 13 when the contact began; Reid transported her across state lines for sex (Mississippi hotel; later to Nevada).
Reid was charged under the Mann Act, 18 U.S.C. § 2423(a), for knowingly transporting a minor in interstate commerce with intent that she engage in illegal sexual activity; jury convicted on two counts (Mississippi and Nevada trips).
District court sentenced Reid to 198 months imprisonment.
On appeal Reid raised four challenges: miscounted peremptory strikes during voir dire; admission of in‑state sexual conduct under Rule 404(b); application of a Sentencing Guidelines enhancement for undue influence over a minor; and inclusion of two prior convictions in his criminal history score.
The Sixth Circuit affirmed: the peremptory miscount was harmless; Rule 404(b) evidence was properly admitted to prove intent; the undue‑influence enhancement applied; and the district court did not clearly err in counting the prior convictions.

Issue	Reid's Argument	Government's Argument	Held
Peremptory strikes miscount (one for‑cause recorded as peremptory)	Court misclassified a for‑cause excusal as a peremptory strike, reducing Reid from 10 to 9 peremptories; reversible error	Miscount was harmless because Reid did not exhaust his peremptories and had one or two left; no juror was wrongfully seated	Error acknowledged but harmless; conviction affirmed
Admission of in‑state sexual conduct (Rule 404(b))	Evidence of in‑state sex was propensity evidence and inadmissible because charge concerned interstate trips only	Evidence admitted to show Reid’s specific intent to engage in sexual activity when transporting J.H. across state lines	Admission proper under Rule 404(b) to prove intent; Rule 403 balance not abused
Sentencing enhancement for undue influence (U.S.S.G. § 2G1.3(b)(2)(B))	Enhancement inappropriate absent force/physical coercion	Reid was >10 years older, manipulated victim, encouraged runaway, transported her far from home—undue influence compromised voluntariness	Enhancement proper; rebuttable presumption applied and evidence supported undue influence
Criminal history points for larceny and escape (U.S.S.G. § 4A1.2(e)(1))	Those sentences did not result in imprisonment during the 15‑year lookback cutoff	Records (Certificate of Termination; discharge dates) supported that imprisonment continued past cutoff	District court’s factual finding not clearly erroneous; points properly assessed

United States v. Martinez‑Salazar, 528 U.S. 304 (2000) (peremptory challenge used to cure an erroneous denial for cause does not violate Rule 24)
Hopt v. People, 120 U.S. 430 (1887) (taking away a peremptory challenge causes no injury where defendant did not exhaust challenges)
The Anarchists’ Case, 123 U.S. 131 (1887) (similar statement that no injury is done where defendant does not exhaust peremptories)
McDonough Power Equip., Inc. v. Greenwood, 464 U.S. 548 (1984) (inaccurate voir dire answers affecting peremptories may not require new trial absent substantial harm)
O’Neal v. McAninch, 513 U.S. 432 (1995) (harmless‑error standards in criminal cases explained)
Rivera v. Illinois, 556 U.S. 148 (2009) (denial of peremptory challenges under state rule does not automatically require reversal under the Constitution)
United States v. Gonzalez‑Lopez, 548 U.S. 140 (2006) (some structural errors require automatic reversal when they infect entire trial)
United States v. McFerron, 163 F.3d 952 (6th Cir. 1998) (improper Batson invocation that results in seating an unwanted juror may require reversal)
United States v. Willoughby, 742 F.3d 229 (6th Cir. 2014) (undue‑influence enhancement not limited to force or physical coercion; covers manipulation of a vulnerable minor)