History
  • No items yet
midpage
United States v. Joseph Vincent Jenkins
2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 6514
| 2d Cir. | 2017
Read the full case

Background

  • Jenkins, a first-time felony offender, was convicted by a jury of possession and transportation of child pornography after Canadian agents found child porn on laptops/USBs when he attempted to enter Canada; U.S. DHS later examined the devices and U.S. authorities prosecuted him.
  • At trial Jenkins lied about device ownership and absence from Canadian proceedings; jury convicted on both counts.
  • The PSR applied U.S.S.G. § 2G2.2 and four common enhancements (prepubescent victim, sexual/violent content, computer use, 600+ images), raising his offense level from 22 to 35; obstruction for false testimony added two levels, producing total offense level 37 (Guidelines range 210–262 months, effectively 210–240 months given statutory caps).
  • The district court sentenced Jenkins to concurrent 120 months (possession) and 225 months (transportation) imprisonment and 25 years of supervised release, citing lack of respect for law, deterrence, incapacitation, and risk of recidivism.
  • The Second Circuit majority held the 225‑month term and the extensive 25‑year supervised‑release conditions substantively unreasonable and vacated and remanded for resentencing; Judge Kearse dissented in part, defending the imprisonment term as within the permissible range.

Issues

Issue Government's Argument Jenkins' Argument Held
Whether the 225‑month imprisonment was substantively reasonable Sentence justified by seriousness, deterrence, incapacitation, Jenkins’ courtroom misconduct and risk to reoffend Sentence excessive given possession‑only, no distribution/production/contact, first felony, age/low recidivism risk Majority: imprisonment substantively unreasonable and vacated; dissent: imprisonment within permissible range
Whether application of §2G2.2 "run‑of‑the‑mill" enhancements was appropriate Enhancements reflect offense characteristics warranting higher Guidelines range Enhancements inflate sentence for non‑production possessors and fail to distinguish worst offenders Majority: §2G2.2 enhancements can yield unreasonable results here; district court erred by treating Jenkins like worst offenders
Whether the 25‑year supervised‑release terms were reasonably related/necessary Conditions protect public and monitor risk (government supported conditions at sentencing) Conditions overly broad, long, and unrelated to Jenkins’ characteristics or concrete risk; impair ability to live/ work Majority: conditions and duration excessive, not adequately justified; vacated and remanded to allow meaningful explanation/adjustment
Whether sentence created unwarranted sentencing disparity under §3553(a)(6) High sentence justified by specific facts (conduct, lack of remorse, evasion) Sentence far higher than typical for possession‑only offenders and many sexual‑abuse sentences; statistics show disparity Majority: sentence produced unwarranted disparity compared to averages and similar non‑production cases

Key Cases Cited

  • United States v. Dorvee, 616 F.3d 174 (2d Cir.) (§2G2.2 can produce unreasonable results for non‑production offenders)
  • United States v. Cavera, 550 F.3d 180 (2d Cir. 2008) (standard for substantive‑reasonableness review)
  • United States v. Broxmeyer, 699 F.3d 265 (2d Cir. 2012) (upholding long sentence where defendant produced child pornography and had contact offenses)
  • United States v. Rigas, 490 F.3d 208 (2d Cir. 2007) (appellate review of unreasonableness limits)
  • United States v. McGinn, 787 F.3d 116 (2d Cir. 2015) ("shockingly high" sentence doctrine)
  • Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38 (2007) (procedural and substantive reasonableness standards)
  • United States v. Brown, 843 F.3d 74 (2d Cir. 2016) (distinguishing production/contact offenders when affirming severe sentence)
  • United States v. Hayes, 445 F.3d 536 (2d Cir. 2006) (review of supervised‑release terms)
  • United States v. Park, 758 F.3d 193 (2d Cir. 2014) (purposes of sentencing: retribution, deterrence, incapacitation)
Read the full case

Case Details

Case Name: United States v. Joseph Vincent Jenkins
Court Name: Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Date Published: Apr 17, 2017
Citation: 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 6514
Docket Number: 14-4295-cr
Court Abbreviation: 2d Cir.