United States v. Lanzon, 639 F.3d 1293

Detective Clifton, undercover as 'Tom', engaged Lanzon in online chats seeking to meet a 14-year-old for sexual activity.
Lanzon, using the handle 'SlingerHD', discussed sexual acts, condoms, and the girl’s preferences, and agreed to meet at a bookstore and then a hotel.
Lanzon drove to the meeting place with condoms and mint-flavored lubricant; he was arrested when he approached undercover officers at the bookstore.
A truck search yielded condoms, lubricant, and a receipt; officers labeled this an inventory search, and Lanzon was indicted for attempting to persuade a minor to engage in sexual activity under § 2422(b) based on Florida § 800.04(4)(a).
A superseding indictment charged attempt under § 800.04(4)(a); Lanzon moved to suppress the truck evidence and challenged the admissibility of the instant-message transcripts.
The district court denied suppression, admitted transcripts, and Lanzon was convicted by jury in 2009; sentence was 60 months' imprisonment and lifetime supervised release.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Sufficiency of the predicate under § 2422(b)	Lanzon argues no valid predicate under Florida § 800.04(4)(a) since it punishes completed acts, not attempts.	Lanzon asserts he could not be charged for an attempt under the Florida statute, thus no § 2422(b) violation.	§ 2422(b) covers attempts; sufficient evidence showed substantial step toward assent and intent to meet.
Whether the truck search was lawfully seized under the automobile exception	The search was valid because probable cause existed and the vehicle was readily mobile.	Argues suppression due to improper inventory/search characterization; challenge to probable cause.	District court did not err; probable cause and automobile exception supported the search.
Admissibility of instant message transcripts and spoliation claims	Transcripts were properly authenticated and relevant; spoliation claims lacked bad faith evidence.	Detective Clifton preserved transcripts improperly; potential spoliation and best-evidence concerns.	Transcripts properly admitted; no bad-faith spoliation evidenced; best-evidence and completeness concerns unresolved against facts.
Jury instruction on spoliation	Trial should have included spoliation instruction or adverse-inference if evidence was destroyed.	No bad faith established; spoliation instruction unnecessary.	No abuse of discretion; spoliation doctrine not recognized criminally; no prejudice shown.

United States v. Murrell, 368 F.3d 1283 (11th Cir. 2004) (focus on § 2422(b) elements and intent to cause assent)
United States v. Root, 296 F.3d 1222 (11th Cir. 2002) (interpretation of 'to engage in' and attempts under § 2422(b))
United States v. Lee, 603 F.3d 904 (11th Cir. 2010) (elements for attempted § 2422(b) conviction)
United States v. Tamari, 454 F.3d 1259 (11th Cir. 2006) (probable cause and vehicle search standards)
United States v. Sabretech, Inc., 271 F.3d 1018 (11th Cir. 2001) (standards for sufficiency review and governing law)
United States v. Caldwell, 776 F.2d 989 (11th Cir. 1985) (basic authentication standard for documents)
United States v. Siddiqui, 235 F.3d 1318 (11th Cir. 2000) (authentication and admissibility of transcripts)
United States v. Puentes, 50 F.3d 1567 (11th Cir. 1995) (transcript admissibility when multiple steps in creation)
United States v. Scott, 436 U.S. 128 (U.S. 1978) (best evidence rule and original documents)
United States v. Simms, 385 F.3d 1347 (11th Cir. 2004) (rule of completeness limitations on 106 in context)
Flury v. DaimlerChrysler Corp., 427 F.3d 939 (11th Cir. 2005) (spoliation sanctions in civil cases)
Bashir v. Amtrak, 119 F.3d 929 (11th Cir. 1997) (adverse-inference instructions in civil cases)
United States v. Arias, 431 F.3d 1327 (11th Cir. 2005) (defense instructions and review standard)
United States v. Martinelli, 454 F.3d 1300 (11th Cir. 2006) (test for granting jury instruction)