United States v. Timothy Jones
699 F. App'x 325
| 5th Cir. | 2017Background
- Timothy Jones convicted at jury trial of multiple sex-trafficking offenses, including conspiracy to commit sex trafficking of children and substantive sex-trafficking counts; sentenced to life imprisonment.
- At sentencing, district court grouped the conspiracy count into multiple underlying “pseudo” offenses for Guidelines calculation and applied multi-level enhancements.
- Evidence at trial showed Jones directed the victim to engage in commercial sex acts on five specific dates and on other occasions; district court found the evidence overwhelming.
- District court applied a serious-bodily-injury enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 2A3.1(b)(4)(B); Jones did not raise that specific objection below.
- The written judgment omitted 18 U.S.C. § 1591(b)(1) (though the indictment and jury verdict included both subsections); government conceded this was a clerical error to be corrected on remand.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether district court erred by treating conspiracy as multiple pseudo-offenses for Guidelines grouping | Jones: court split conspiracy into multiple uncharged pseudo offenses and enhanced offense level without required findings under U.S.S.G. § 1B1.2(d) n.4 | Government: evidence supports finding of guilt on underlying offenses; grouping and enhancement appropriate | No plain error; evidence would permit a reasonable juror to find underlying offenses beyond a reasonable doubt |
| Whether individual underlying offenses must be specifically alleged in the indictment for Application Note 4 purposes | Jones: pseudo-offenses were not alleged, so they shouldn’t have been used | Government: other circuits permit using uncharged underlying offenses for grouping when evidentiary support exists | Not a clear or obvious error; circuit hasn’t decided but other circuits reject Jones’s reading |
| Whether serious-bodily-injury enhancement was improper because injuries didn’t meet Guidelines definition | Jones: injuries insufficient under § 2A3.1 definition; district court relied on criminal sexual abuse already accounted for | Government: preponderance of evidence shows serious bodily injury apart from sexual abuse | No plain error; enhancement supported by evidence beyond sexual abuse accounted in base offense level |
| Whether base offense level miscalculated by using wrong subsection of § 1591 in judgment | Jones: written judgment lists only § 1591(b)(2), so base offense level may be wrong | Government: indictment and verdict show convictions under both (b)(1) and (b)(2); omission in judgment is clerical | No merit to sentencing error; court remanded to correct clerical omission in judgment |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Peltier, 505 F.3d 389 (5th Cir.) (plain-error review for unpreserved sentencing objections)
- Puckett v. United States, 556 U.S. 129 (U.S.) (plain-error standard reaffirmed)
- United States v. Fisher, 22 F.3d 574 (5th Cir.) (limits on using uncharged underlying offenses absent jury finding)
- United States v. Ford, 761 F.3d 641 (6th Cir.) (individual offenses need not be alleged to apply Application Note 4)
- United States v. Robles, 562 F.3d 451 (2d Cir.) (same)
- United States v. Salinas, 480 F.3d 750 (5th Cir.) (clear-or-obvious error analysis)
- United States v. Bell, 367 F.3d 452 (5th Cir.) (serious bodily injury standard under Guidelines)
- United States v. Johnson, 588 F.2d 961 (5th Cir.) (authority to correct clerical errors on remand)