United States v. Joshua Thomas Hill
2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 6348
| 11th Cir. | 2015Background
- Hill and two accomplices picked up and prostituted 14-year-old girls; Hill photographed them and used internet ads to solicit clients.
- Hill directed photos be posted, set prices, arranged transport, paid accomplices, and kept most proceeds.
- Indicted for conspiracy to commit child sex trafficking under 18 U.S.C. § 1594(c); pleaded guilty to the conspiracy count.
- At sentencing, Probation and the Government urged two enhancements: +2 for computer use under U.S.S.G. § 2G1.3(b)(3)(B) and +2 for a supervisory role under U.S.S.G. § 3B1.1(c); district court applied both and sentenced Hill to 192 months.
- Hill appealed, arguing (1) the computer-use enhancement did not apply because the commentary limits it to communications with minors or their guardians, and (2) the supervisory-role enhancement was not supported by the facts.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether § 2G1.3(b)(3)(B) enhancement applies when defendant used a computer to advertise minors for sex (vs. communicating directly with a minor/guardian) | Hill: application note 4 limits the enhancement to direct communications with minors or their custodians, so advertising does not qualify | Government: plain text of (b)(3)(B) covers using a computer to solicit a person to engage in sexual conduct with a minor, including ads | Court: Adopted Fifth Circuit reasoning in Pringler; application note was a drafting error and is inconsistent with the guideline; enhancement applies. |
| Whether § 3B1.1(c) supervisory-role enhancement is supported by the record | Hill: his role did not rise to organizer/leader/manager/supervisor level | Government: Hill recruited accomplices, set prices, arranged transport, paid others, and kept profits, showing supervisory control | Court: Facts support supervisory role; district court’s finding not clearly erroneous; enhancement applies. |
Key Cases Cited
- Stinson v. United States, 508 U.S. 36 (1993) (authoritative force of Sentencing Commission commentary)
- Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38 (2007) (procedural-reasonableness standard for sentencing)
- United States v. Pringler, 765 F.3d 445 (5th Cir. 2014) (application note was drafting error; plain language of § 2G1.3(b)(3)(B) controls)
- United States v. Njau, 386 F.3d 1039 (11th Cir. 2004) (factors supporting role-enhancement: recruitment, setting prices, paying accomplices, keeping profits)
- United States v. Rodriguez De Varon, 175 F.3d 930 (11th Cir. 1999) (clear-error review for role-in-offense findings)