United States v. Daniel Ladeau
688 F. App'x 342
6th Cir.2017Background
- Brothers David and Daniel Ladeau exchanged about 80 coded letters while David was detained; letters discussed sexual interest in young boys and methods to find/download child pornography.
- Daniel was interviewed after a search; he confessed and admitted using devices to search and store child pornography, but his confession and thumb drives were suppressed at trial.
- Government proceeded on conspiracy charge using David’s testimony and the letters; Daniel was convicted of conspiracy to possess child pornography and sentenced to 115 months.
- Daniel moved for judgment of acquittal arguing evidence showed only aiding and abetting, not a conspiracy; the district court denied the motion and the jury convicted.
- On appeal Daniel challenged (1) sufficiency of evidence for conspiracy, (2) denial of a two-level acceptance-of-responsibility reduction, and (3) a five-level sentencing enhancement for a pattern of sexual abuse of minors.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence for conspiracy | Evidence (letters + David’s testimony) shows a tacit mutual understanding that David would help Daniel obtain child pornography | Letters show only help/encouragement; at most aiding and abetting, no agreement between brothers | Affirmed: a rational jury could find an agreement from coded correspondence, instructions, solicitations, and accomplice testimony |
| Acceptance-of-responsibility reduction under U.S.S.G. §3E1.1 | Defendant admits some conduct and argues he never denied guilt, so should get reduction | Defendant contested an essential factual element (existence of conspiracy) at trial, putting government to its proof | Affirmed: denial of reduction not clearly erroneous because defendant contested factual guilt |
| Applicability of §2G2.2(b)(5) pattern-of-activity enhancement | Past abuse decades earlier is unrelated and should not trigger the enhancement | Guideline commentary (amended 1996) permits prior, unrelated instances of sexual abuse to count toward the pattern enhancement | Affirmed: the 1996 amendment and authoritative commentary allow applying the enhancement for prior abuse unrelated in time to the instant offense |
Key Cases Cited
- Fisher v. United States, 648 F.3d 442 (6th Cir.) (standard for reviewing sufficiency of the evidence)
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (U.S. 1979) (reasonable-doubt sufficiency standard for appellate review)
- Giovannetti v. United States, 919 F.2d 1223 (7th Cir.) (distinguishes aiding and abetting from conspiracy)
- Falcone v. United States, 311 U.S. 205 (U.S. 1940) (sellers’ knowledge of illicit use not necessarily a conspiracy)
- Wettstain v. United States, 618 F.3d 577 (6th Cir.) (uncorroborated accomplice testimony may support conviction)
- Stinson v. United States, 508 U.S. 36 (U.S. 1993) (Guidelines commentary is authoritative absent conflict)
- Surratt v. United States, 87 F.3d 814 (6th Cir.) (prior precedent regarding relation of past abuse to offense of conviction)
- Chapman v. United States, 60 F.3d 894 (1st Cir.) (addressed scope of pattern-of-activity enhancement prior to 1996 amendment)
- Pulgar v. United States, 789 F.3d 807 (7th Cir.) (repeated transactions without more do not necessarily establish conspiracy)
- Gawthrop v. United States, 310 F.3d 405 (6th Cir.) (recognizing the 1996 guideline amendment clarifying pattern-of-activity scope)