United States v. Raymond
2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 21022
1st Cir.2012Background
- James Raymond, a 29-year-old elementary school music teacher in Auburn, Maine, was indicted for transporting a minor with intent to engage in criminal sexual activity in interstate commerce.
- Two occasions in July and August 2007 involved Raymond driving two underage girls (11-year-old pupil and her sister) to Canobie Lake Park in New Hampshire, without an accompanying adult.
- The district court found that one motive was sexual contact with the 11-year-old if opportunity arose; buttocks touching occurred on both trips.
- Evidence tied to a June 2007 school bus trip, another girl’s testimony of touching, and a police videotape of Raymond discussing impulses and masturbation were used to prove intent.
- PSI calculated a guideline range of 262–327 months; the district court imposed a 12-year sentence below the range.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Rule 404(b) admissibility of prior acts | Evidence shows intent to commit unlawful sex acts. | Evidence is improper character evidence and prejudicial. | Forfeited, and in any event admissible under 404(b) for intent with proper balancing. |
| Cross-examination limits of Detective Syphers | Defense should fully probe bias and interview techniques. | Cross-examination should elicit bias; court overly limited questioning about pattern of progression. | Court did not abuse discretion; defendant had a reasonable opportunity to impeach. |
| Sentence for transporting a minor with intent | Twelve-year sentence exceeds the statutory minimum and is disproportionate. | Sentence should be no more than the minimum; extreme punishment is unwarranted. | Sentence not grossly disproportionate and substantively reasonable. |
Key Cases Cited
- Huddleston v. United States, 485 U.S. 681 (Supreme Court, 1988) (standard for probative value of Rule 404(b) evidence)
- United States v. Varoudakis, 233 F.3d 113 (1st Cir. 2000) (special relevance and balancing under Rule 404(b))
- Griffin v. United States, 818 F.2d 97 (1st Cir. 1987) (pretrial in limine rulings must be renewed at trial to preserve objection)
- Puckett v. United States, 556 U.S. 129 (Supreme Court, 2009) (plain error review for unpreserved evidentiary claims)
- Solem v. Helm, 463 U.S. 277 (Supreme Court, 1983) (gross disproportionality standard for Eighth Amendment)
- Ewing v. California, 538 U.S. 11 (Supreme Court, 2003) (disproportionality review limited; most sentences will not fail this test)
- United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 (Supreme Court, 2005) (reasonableness and broad guidelines framework)
- Martínez-Vives v. United States, 475 F.3d 48 (1st Cir. 2007) (scope of cross-examination and Confrontation Clause limits)
- United States v. Pontoo, 666 F.3d 20 (1st Cir. 2011) (trial court credibility determinations within Rule 404(b) context)