627 F. App'x 567
7th Cir.2015Background
- Brewster lived with his wife and three daughters in Portage, Indiana; he stayed home with the children while his wife worked.
- For years, Brewster sexually abused his oldest daughter, beginning by age six or earlier, exposing her to porn and attempting intercourse.
- He repeatedly forced the daughter to perform oral sex and videotaped some acts; he also coerced her with privileges and access to activities.
- When his second daughter was three or four, Brewster began making her perform oral sex on him; mother found videotapes of abuse.
- Brewster pleaded guilty to four counts of producing child pornography, one count of receiving, and one count of possessing; district court sentenced him to 420 months plus 20 years supervised release.
- The court stated Brewster had “repeatedly forced” his daughter to engage in sexual acts; Brewster also later pled guilty to state charges and sentence is consecutive to the federal term.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the sentence was based on erroneous information | United States contends the district court did not rely on a clearly erroneous fact. | Brewster argues the court relied on a mischaracterization of ‘force’ as physical coercion. | No plain error; court properly construed ‘force’ as coercion, not necessarily physical violence. |
| Validity of polygraph condition in supervised release | Government argues polygraph testing is appropriate to ensure compliance given evidence of deception. | Brewster challenges the condition as excessive or inappropriate. | Polygraph condition affirmed as appropriate to ensure honest self-assessment and compliance. |
| Prohibition on frequenting places where minors congregate and related communications | Government defends broad no-contact-with minors as a necessary safety measure. | Brewster argues the condition is overbroad, vague, and lacks scienter. | Condition upheld given extreme abuse; caveat allowing ordinary business minors and potential post-release modification. |
Key Cases Cited
- Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38 (U.S. 2007) (procedural error standard for sentencing based on erroneous facts)
- United States v. Corona-Gonzalez, 628 F.3d 336 (7th Cir. 2012) (plain-error review for facts supporting sentence)
- United States v. Durham, 645 F.3d 883 (7th Cir. 2011) (sentence potentially based on erroneous fact may require remand)
- United States v. Johnson, 446 F.3d 272 (2d Cir. 2006) (polygraph as condition of supervised release; self-incrimination caveat)
- United States v. Taylor, 338 F.3d 1280 (11th Cir. 2003) (no-contact-with minors condition; considerations of scope)
- United States v. Kappes, 782 F.3d 828 (7th Cir. 2015) (modification of supervised-release conditions after release)