971 F.3d 16
1st Cir.2020Background
- Goodman, an Electric Boat employee, was discovered using his phone at work; a supervisor unlocked it and a security officer found numerous nude images and videos of minors, including apparent images of Goodman's daughters.
- Police arrested Goodman; he admitted possessing and distributing child pornography and admitted repeated sexual contact with multiple minor victims; a home search recovered ~7,800 images and 370 videos.
- Goodman entered a plea agreement: guilty to eight counts of sexual exploitation of a minor (18 U.S.C. § 2251(a)) and one count of possession of child pornography (18 U.S.C. § 2252(a)(4)(B)); he waived the right to appeal convictions and sentence if the sentence was within or below the Guidelines range.
- At the plea hearing Goodman admitted producing videos of an 11-year-old girl entering/exiting a shower; the court accepted the plea despite a later Rule 11(b)(3) challenge to the factual basis for two counts.
- The District Court imposed consecutive terms totaling 3,120 months (360 months on each §2251 count and 240 months on the possession count); Goodman appealed two convictions and aspects of his sentence.
Issues
| Issue | Goodman’s Argument | Government’s Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of factual basis for two §2251 convictions (Rule 11) | Plea lacked factual basis to show "lascivious exhibition" (only "mere nudity") | Videos and admissions showed focus on genitals, surreptitious camera placement and editing sufficient for lasciviousness | Court affirmed convictions — no plain error; plea admissions and video facts sufficed |
| Enforceability of appeal waiver — lack of consideration | Waiver unenforceable because government’s promised one-level recommendation (U.S.S.G. §3E1.1(b)) gave no real consideration (no reduction below life) | Promise to recommend the one-level reduction constituted adequate consideration — it gave a "chance at less" | Waiver enforceable; consideration requirement met |
| Whether sentence exceeded plea condition (sentence "within or below" Guidelines) | 3,120-month term functionally exceeds life and thus falls outside Guideline range contemplated by plea | Multiple-county consecutive sentence under U.S.S.G. §5G1.2(d) can produce multi-century terms; such terms are functionally equivalent to life and consistent with precedent | Court rejected claim; sentence not treated as exceeding the plea condition (Saccoccia precedent) |
| Whether appeal waiver bars sentencing challenges (Teeter miscarriage-of-justice) | Waiver should not bar review because sentence unreasonable and district court erred in enhancements | Waiver is presumptively valid; challenges here are garden-variety and do not meet Teeter miscarriage-of-justice exception | Waiver bars review of sentencing challenges; miscarriage-of-justice prong not satisfied; appeal dismissed in part |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Torres-Vázquez, 731 F.3d 41 (1st Cir. 2013) (appeal waiver does not bar challenge to the validity of the plea itself)
- United States v. Matos-Quiñones, 456 F.3d 14 (1st Cir. 2006) (district court must have a reasoned basis to believe defendant committed the crime to accept plea)
- United States v. Holmes, 814 F.3d 1246 (11th Cir. 2016) (placement and focus of camera can show lascivious exhibition)
- United States v. Rivera-Cruz, 878 F.3d 404 (1st Cir. 2017) (plea agreements analyzed as contracts; government’s promise to recommend §3E1.1(b) reduction can be adequate consideration)
- United States v. Saccoccia, 58 F.3d 754 (1st Cir. 1995) (multi-century sentences treated as functional equivalents of life sentences)
- United States v. Teeter, 257 F.3d 14 (1st Cir. 2001) (framework for assessing enforceability of appeal waivers, including "miscarriage of justice" exception)
- United States v. Betancourt-Pérez, 833 F.3d 18 (1st Cir. 2016) (Teeter standards reiterated; waivers presumptively valid)
- United States v. Villodas-Rosario, 901 F.3d 10 (1st Cir. 2018) (miscarriage-of-justice prong is sparingly applied; rejects garden-variety sentencing claims)
- United States v. Miranda-Díaz, 942 F.3d 33 (1st Cir. 2019) (district court may rely on unobjected-to PSR findings in sentencing)