United States v. Joubert
2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 2127
1st Cir.2015Background
- In 2012 local police and the FBI investigated Robert Joubert on multiple allegations that he molested boys he coached and photographed/videotaped; one victim (KC) later identified himself and Joubert in a seized VHS tape showing sexual conduct.
- Joubert moved from a prior address into his parents’ Manchester, NH home; an 86‑year‑old non‑biological son (SJ) reported seeing Joubert dismantle a computer and expressed concern Joubert would destroy hard drives.
- Investigators obtained a warrant to search Joubert’s parents’ home for, inter alia, computers, cameras, tapes, and photographs; a search yielded a pornographic VHS recording of KC and other electronic media.
- A federal grand jury indicted Joubert on three counts under 18 U.S.C. § 2251(a) (sexual exploitation to produce visual depictions) and one count under 18 U.S.C. § 2252A(a)(5)(B) (possession of child pornography).
- At trial the court admitted testimony from three uncharged victims under Rule 414 over Joubert’s Rule 403 objections; jury convicted. The district court sentenced Joubert to 480 months after a substantial downward variance from the Guidelines.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Government) | Defendant's Argument (Joubert) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Search warrant nexus | Affidavit and facts (photos, SJ’s statements, dismantled computer, residence) gave fair probability evidence would be at parents’ home | Affidavit lacked nexus to place searched; no allegation crime occurred there; items might be destroyed or kept elsewhere | Warrant supported probable cause; nexus inferred from nature of items, living arrangements, SJ’s observations; search upheld |
| Admission of uncharged molestation evidence (Rule 414 vs 403) | Evidence of other child‑molestation incidents was relevant to propensity and corroborated KC’s testimony | Testimony was stale, cumulative, and unfairly prejudicial under Rule 403 | Admission not an abuse of discretion; Rule 414 permits propensity evidence and district court reasonably balanced probative value vs prejudice |
| Commerce Clause / federal jurisdiction (possession charge) | VHS tape’s interstate nexus (copying/transport) suffices under circuit precedent to satisfy §2252A interstate commerce element | A locally made, privately held VHS has no sufficient interstate nexus; federal statute overreaches | Held constitutional under existing precedent (United States v. Burdulis); Joubert preserved issue for Supreme Court review but panel follows binding circuit law |
| Substantive reasonableness of 480‑month sentence | Sentence reflects defendant’s decades‑long pattern, danger to minors, and need to protect public; district court considered mitigating factors | Sentence was excessive: insufficient weight to mitigation, longer than national averages, effectively a life term for a 60‑year‑old | Sentence not substantively unreasonable; district court gave plausible sentencing rationale and permissibly weighed factors; variance warranted |
Key Cases Cited
- Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213 (probable‑cause nexus review and review deferential to magistrate)
- United States v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897 (good‑faith exception to exclusionary rule)
- United States v. Beckett, 321 F.3d 26 (photographs as items created for preservation; staleness)
- United States v. Burdulis, 753 F.3d 255 (1st Cir. precedent that interstate travel/copying of media can satisfy §2252A interstate commerce element)
- United States v. Lyons, 740 F.3d 702 (standard for probable‑cause sufficiency review)
- United States v. Rodrigue, 560 F.3d 29 (practical, common‑sense nexus inquiry)
- United States v. Lopez, 514 U.S. 549 (limits on Commerce Clause)
- United States v. Morrison, 529 U.S. 598 (rejecting aggregation of non‑economic violent conduct to justify federal regulation)
- Nat’l Fed’n of Indep. Bus. v. Sebelius, 132 S. Ct. 2566 (discussion of limits on Commerce Clause authority)