United States v. David Vickers
683 F. App'x 393
| 6th Cir. | 2017Background
- Defendant David Vickers communicated on Experience Project with an undercover investigator (posing as a 29-year-old "Traci" and her fictitious 13-year-old daughter "Katie") and expressed persistent sexual interest in the child, sent explicit videos of minors, and admitted past sexual conduct with minors.
- Investigator Miranda Helmick, an Ohio ICAC Task Force member, created the undercover profile to identify persons seeking sexual activity with minors; she engaged Vickers in extended chats and text exchanges, including direct messages with the persona "Katie."
- Vickers traveled from Virginia to Ohio to meet Traci/Katie and was arrested at the meeting site. A jury convicted him of: (1) distributing child pornography (18 U.S.C. § 2252(a)(2)); (2) enticing a minor (18 U.S.C. § 2422(b)); and (3) traveling in interstate commerce to engage in illicit sexual conduct (18 U.S.C. § 2423(b)).
- The Presentence Report yielded a Guidelines range of life; the district court imposed statutory maximums resulting in a life sentence on the enticement count.
- On appeal Vickers argued: (1) outrageous government conduct/due process violation (manufactured criminality); (2) ineffective assistance of counsel for failing to litigate mental-health and investigative-protocol issues and for suboptimal cross-examination; and (3) substantive unreasonableness of the life sentence.
- The Sixth Circuit affirmed the conviction and sentence, declining to reach the merits of ineffective-assistance claims on direct appeal and rejecting the due-process and sentencing challenges.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Outrageous government conduct / due process | Vickers: undercover operation improperly induced and repeatedly provoked him to commit crimes, so prosecution violates due process | Government: undercover provided opportunity; Vickers was predisposed and conduct was not conscience-shocking | Court: Rejected; defense amounts to inducement/entrapment (waived) and, on merits, agent's conduct not outrageous given facts and Vickers' predisposition |
| Ineffective assistance of counsel | Vickers: trial counsel failed to raise mental-health issues, attack agent's experience, and probe Task Force protocols | Government: record shows counsel challenged agent and protocols; claims are undeveloped strategic choices | Court: Declined to adjudicate on direct appeal; claims largely unsubstantiated on the record and better raised under § 2255 |
| Substantive reasonableness of life sentence | Vickers: life sentence greater than necessary; plea offer showed lesser sentence possible; district court overemphasized deterrence for a first-time offender | Government: within-Guidelines sentence presumptively reasonable; evidence showed long-term predatory conduct and high risk to children | Court: Affirmed life sentence as within-Guidelines and not substantively unreasonable; district court properly weighed § 3553(a) factors |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Al-Cholan, 610 F.3d 945 (6th Cir. 2010) (discusses limits of outrageous-government-conduct defense and plain-error review)
- United States v. Amawi, 695 F.3d 457 (6th Cir. 2012) (explains that due-process outrageous-conduct claims cannot be used to evade entrapment/predisposition inquiry)
- United States v. Napier, 787 F.3d 333 (6th Cir. 2015) (describes standard for "conscience-shocking" government conduct)
- United States v. Blood, 435 F.3d 612 (6th Cir. 2006) (limits availability of outrageous-conduct defense when claim sounds in inducement)
- United States v. Moore, 916 F.2d 1131 (6th Cir. 1990) (undercover opportunities do not negate predisposition where defendant's conduct predates agent contact)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (governs ineffective-assistance-of-counsel standard)
- United States v. Vonner, 516 F.3d 382 (6th Cir. 2008) (presumption of reasonableness for within-Guidelines sentences)