United States v. Encarnacion-Ruiz
787 F.3d 581
| 1st Cir. | 2015Background
- Encarnación-Ruiz was charged with aiding and abetting the production of child pornography in a 2010 video with KMV, a 14-year-old, and co-defendant Vilanova-Delgado.
- Encarnación argued a mistake-of-age by KMV should be a defense; the district court granted a motion in limine to preclude this defense.
- He entered a conditional guilty plea reserving appeal on whether the victim’s age could be raised as a defense under § 2251(a).
- The Supreme Court’s Rosemond decision clarified mens rea for aiding and abetting, prompting the First Circuit to consider whether knowledge that the victim was a minor is required for § 2251(a) aiders/abettors.
- The court held that Rosemond requires advance knowledge of the age of the minor for aiding and abetting a § 2251(a) offense, vacating the conviction and remanding.
- Encarnación admitted on plea and at change-of-plea that he participated in filming sexually explicit conduct with a minor, with the plea language indicating aiding and abetting the production of child pornography.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does Rosemond require advance knowledge the victim is a minor for aider/abettor liability under § 2251(a)? | Encarnación: Rosemond demands knowledge of the minor’s status for aiders/abettors. | Encarna-ción: The government need not prove knowledge of minor for principal or aide/abetter liability; Rosemond applies to aiders/abettors. | Yes; Rosemond requires advance knowledge of the minor. |
| Was Encarnación’s conviction for production of child pornography proper to affirm as a principal, an aider and abettor, or both? | Majority: Indictment charged both principal and aider/abettor theories; he pleaded as aider/abettor only. | Encarnación: Indictment charged both theories; plea record shows admission to both roles. | Indictment charged Encarnación as both a principal and an aider and abettor; plea admitted both theories. |
| Is Encarnación entitled to a mistake-of-age defense as a principal charged under § 2251(a)? | Plaintiff (government) contends no mistake-of-age defense for § 2251(a). | Encarnación: No mistake-of-age defense for principal; Rosemond controls aiders/abettors. | Mistake-of-age defense not available to a principal under § 2251(a); Rosemond applicability to aiders/abettors is dispositive for this appeal. |
Key Cases Cited
- X-Citement Video, Inc. v. United States, 513 U.S. 64 (U.S. 1994) (statutory-age knowledge not required for production offenses; strict-liability aspects discussed)
- Rosemond v. United States, 134 S. Ct. 1240 (U.S. 2014) (requires advance knowledge of the scope of the crime for aider/abettor liability)
- Hilario-Hilario, 529 F.3d 65 (1st Cir. 2008) (indictment language 'aiding and abetting each other' can charge principal and aider/abettor liability)
- Matos-Quinones, 456 F.3d 14 (1st Cir. 2006) (indictments with 'aiding and abetting each other' language; concurrent theories of liability)
- Ramirez-Burgos v. United States, 313 F.3d 23 (1st Cir. 2002) (carjacking cases applying aiding/abetting framework)
- Sanchez v. United States, 917 F.2d 607 (1st Cir. 1990) (aiding and abetting is an alternative charge, proven without unfair surprise)