Background

• Defendant was charged under federal Mann Act provisions; court reconsidered whether 18 U.S.C. § 2421 reaches conduct wholly within the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico.
• The Government argued § 2421 applies to Puerto Rico because the Commonwealth is a U.S. territory.
• Congress amended statutes in 1998 (Protection of Children from Sexual Predators Act), adding “any commonwealth” to 18 U.S.C. § 2423(a) but not to § 2421, and made other changes to § 2421’s text.
• The differing post-1998 wording of § 2421 and § 2423(a) created an ambiguity whether § 2421 covers intrastate conduct in a commonwealth like Puerto Rico.
• The court applied the rule of lenity and due-process vagueness principles to resolve statutory ambiguity in favor of the defendant.
• Result: the court held § 2421 is ambiguous as to Puerto Rico, resolved that ambiguity for the defendant, treated § 2421 as inapplicable to intrastate conduct in Puerto Rico, and vacated its prior judgment.

Issues

Key Cases Cited

• Soto-Hernandez v. Holder, 729 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 2013) (First Circuit recognizes rule of lenity application)
• United States v. Jimenez, 507 F.3d 13 (1st Cir. 2007) (rule of lenity applies only when grievous ambiguity exists)
• Cleveland v. United States, 531 U.S. 12 (Sup. Ct.) (ambiguity in criminal statutes resolved for accused)
• United States v. Bowen, 127 F.3d 9 (1st Cir. 1997) (rule of lenity promotes fair notice and limits arbitrary enforcement)
• United States v. Kozminski, 487 U.S. 931 (Sup. Ct.) (purpose of limiting prosecutorial and judicial overreach in criminal statutes)
• Johnson v. United States, 135 S. Ct. 2551 (Sup. Ct.) (void-for-vagueness protects due process and fair notice)