United States v. James Brown, IV
681 F. App'x 268
| 4th Cir. | 2017Background
- James A. Brown IV was convicted by a jury of enticing a minor to engage in criminal sexual activity under 18 U.S.C. § 2422(b) and sentenced to the 120-month mandatory minimum.
- The offense arose from email exchanges with an undercover agent Brown believed was a 13-year-old girl; Brown repeatedly solicited and pressured the agent to meet for sex.
- At trial Brown sought an entrapment jury instruction, arguing government inducement and lack of predisposition; the district court refused the instruction.
- Brown moved for an Eighth Amendment proportionality review and asked the court to strike the mandatory minimum sentence as grossly disproportionate; the district court denied the motion.
- Brown appealed, arguing (1) the district court erred in declining the entrapment instruction and (2) the mandatory 10-year sentence violated the Eighth Amendment as applied.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the district court should have given an entrapment instruction | Brown: evidence showed government inducement and lack of predisposition | Gov: record shows Brown aggressively solicited what he believed was a 13-year-old and was predisposed | Court: No error; Brown failed to produce more than a scintilla of evidence of entrapment |
| Whether the mandatory 120-month sentence violated the Eighth Amendment as applied | Brown: his lack of prior record and that no minor was actually harmed make the sentence grossly disproportionate | Gov: Congress set the mandatory minimum to protect children; sentence is not grossly disproportionate | Court: No error; threshold inference of gross disproportionality not shown; sentence upheld |
Key Cases Cited
- Mathews v. United States, 485 U.S. 58 (defining entrapment elements)
- United States v. Hsu, 364 F.3d 192 (4th Cir.) (burden to produce more than a scintilla for entrapment instruction)
- United States v. Hackley, 662 F.3d 671 (4th Cir.) (standard of review for refusing entrapment instruction)
- Graham v. Florida, 560 U.S. 48 (Eighth Amendment proportionality principle)
- United States v. Cobler, 748 F.3d 570 (4th Cir.) (threshold inference and comparative analysis in as-applied proportionality challenges)
- Harmelin v. Michigan, 501 U.S. 957 (legislature's role in fixing prison terms)
- United States v. Shill, 740 F.3d 1347 (9th Cir.) (rejecting categorical Eighth Amendment challenge to § 2422(b) mandatory minimum)
- United States v. Hughes, 632 F.3d 956 (6th Cir.) (rejecting as-applied challenge to ten-year sentence under § 2422(b))
- United States v. Nagel, 559 F.3d 756 (7th Cir.) (rejecting facial and as-applied challenges to § 2422(b) mandatory minimum)