768 F.3d 1086
10th Cir.2014Background
- Marcus Lewis, a convicted sex offender last registered in Kansas (May 2011), left his Kansas residence, traveled through Missouri, and was later arrested in Georgia (July 2012). He never updated his SORNA registration after leaving Kansas.
- Lewis admitted traveling interstate, living transiently (shelter, employment in Georgia), and knowing he was required to register in Georgia but avoided doing so to evade arrest on unrelated Kansas warrants.
- A federal grand jury in the District of Kansas indicted Lewis under 18 U.S.C. § 2250(a) for knowingly failing to register between August 2011 and July 2012; he was convicted after a stipulated bench trial and sentenced to 24 months.
- Lewis moved for dismissal and for judgment of acquittal based on improper venue and insufficient evidence that the offense occurred in Kansas; the district court denied relief.
- The Tenth Circuit considered whether a § 2250 failure-to-register offense may be prosecuted in the departure district where the offender abandoned residence and whether such an offense is a continuing offense giving rise to multiple proper venues.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Lewis) | Defendant's Argument (Government) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether venue in the departure district (Kansas) is proper for § 2250 prosecutions | Venue improper; violation only consummated in arrival states (Missouri/Georgia) after residency established | Departure district is a "jurisdiction involved" when offender abandons residence; abandonment triggers reporting obligation and offense begins there | Venue is proper in the departure district (Kansas) |
| Whether SORNA reporting obligation attaches on abandonment or only on establishing a new residence | Obligation arises only upon establishing new residence or when periodic registration due | Abandonment of prior residence triggers the § 16913(c) reporting duty and the 3-day clock; failure to register then begins offense | Reporting obligation attaches on abandonment, so offense can begin in departure district |
| Whether § 2250 is a continuing offense subject to 18 U.S.C. § 3237 for venue purposes | § 2250 is a discrete failure at the place of noncompliance, not continuing | § 2250 is a continuing offense from abandonment until registration or arrest, creating multiple venues under § 3237 | § 2250 is a continuing offense; venue may be in any district where offense was begun, continued, or completed |
| Whether evidence supported venue within indictment period | Temporal gaps undermine showing Kansas was locus during charged period | Government proved abandonment of Kansas and failure to register elsewhere during indictment period | Evidence sufficiently showed Kansas remained a jurisdiction involved during the indictment period; venue sustained |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Murphy, 664 F.3d 798 (10th Cir.) (abandonment of residence triggers SORNA reporting obligation; departure state remains a jurisdiction involved)
- Carr v. United States, 560 U.S. 438 (Sup. Ct.) (elements of § 2250 are sequential)
- United States v. Hinckley, 550 F.3d 926 (10th Cir.) (construing § 2250 as a continuing offense)
- United States v. Leach, 639 F.3d 769 (7th Cir.) (venue proper in departure district for SORNA failure-to-register)
- United States v. Van Buren, 599 F.3d 170 (2d Cir.) (departure-district venue proper under § 3237 for continuing SORNA violation)
- United States v. Howell, 552 F.3d 709 (8th Cir.) (departure jurisdiction may be proper venue when offender moves interstate without updating registration)
- United States v. Pietrantonio, 637 F.3d 865 (8th Cir.) (SORNA violation continues until arrest or registration)
- United States v. Lunsford, 725 F.3d 859 (8th Cir.) (discussing limits of departure-district registration obligations; did not reject departure-venue precedent)
- United States v. Kelly, 535 F.3d 1229 (10th Cir.) (standard of review for venue sufficiency)