United States v. James Hitt
19-10116
| 9th Cir. | Feb 28, 2022Background
- James Jay Hitt was convicted for receipt and distribution of child pornography in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2252A(a)(2); he appealed and the Ninth Circuit affirmed.
- The government linked the king.james123456 email account (the “king james account”) that received/distributed child pornography to Hitt through multiple pieces of evidence: the account used the username “James Hitt,” accessed an account tied to Hitt’s home address/phone, received emails from Hitt’s wife, listed Hitt’s truck on Craigslist, and provided Hitt’s home phone number.
- Forensic evidence showed the same computer/storage devices holding the child pornography also contained Hitt’s resume, family photos, credit reports, and search-history timing consistent with emails from the king james account.
- The government introduced, under Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b), Hitt’s 1993 conviction for lewd and lascivious acts with a minor under 14 to prove the king james account user’s identity; the district court sanitized the evidence via a limited stipulation.
- The district court admitted images/videos of child pornography without the judge first viewing them (an acknowledged error), but the Ninth Circuit found that error harmless given the weight of other evidence.
- At sentencing the court applied a five-level enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 2G2.2(b)(5) for a "pattern of activity involving the sexual abuse or exploitation of a minor" based on Hitt’s confession to repeated sexual abuse of a nine-year-old; the sentence was upheld as substantively reasonable.
Issues
| Issue | Hitt's Argument | Government's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admissibility of prior conviction under F.R.E. 404(b) | Evidence was unfairly prejudicial and remote | Admitted to prove identity; probative and properly sanitized | District court did not abuse discretion; 404(b) admission proper |
| Admission of child-porn images without judge viewing | Admission without viewing was error requiring reversal | Error harmless because other evidence overwhelmingly proved guilt | Error acknowledged but harmless; conviction stands |
| Sentencing enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 2G2.2(b)(5) for pattern of sexual abuse | Enhancement improper / contested | 1993 confession showed two or more instances constituting a pattern | No plain error; enhancement proper based on confessed conduct |
| Substantive reasonableness of sentence | Sentence substantively unreasonable given mitigation (abuse history, health) | Court balanced § 3553(a) factors, emphasized deterrence/public safety | Sentence was substantively reasonable and affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Hardrick, 766 F.3d 1051 (9th Cir. 2014) (articulating the four-part 404(b) test)
- United States v. Curtin, 489 F.3d 935 (9th Cir. 2007) (en banc) (court must view child pornography images before admitting)
- United States v. Carpenter, 923 F.3d 1172 (9th Cir. 2019) (harmless-error analysis for improperly admitted evidence)
- United States v. Bailey, 696 F.3d 794 (9th Cir. 2012) (weight of properly admitted evidence can render other errors harmless)
- United States v. Thornhill, 940 F.3d 1114 (9th Cir. 2019) (use of sanitized stipulation to mitigate unfair prejudice from prior-conviction evidence)
- Rosales-Mireles v. United States, 138 S. Ct. 1897 (2018) (plain-error review framework)
- United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984 (9th Cir. 2008) (standards for substantive reasonableness on appeal)