United States v. Tyrone McMillian
2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 1369
7th Cir.2015Background
- Defendant convicted after a one-week jury trial of four counts of 18 U.S.C. §1591(a) for recruiting minors into prostitution, transporting them across state lines, and using coercive/fraudulent tactics.
- One recruit was 19 (over 18); others were 16 and 17; four victims in total.
- Guideline range was life; district court imposed 30-year sentence below the range.
- Court addressed ex post facto challenges to guideline amendments (Nov. 1, 2007 update to §§2G1.1 and 2G1.3).
- Court assessed issues including one-book rule, computer-use enhancement, undue-influence enhancement, and supervision-release conditions, vacating the sentence and remanding for re-sentencing.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether applying the 2007 guideline amendments violates the Ex Post Facto Clause | Government argues range may be life or life-to- max; reflects post-change law | Weaver/Weiss-type challenge: change punishes retroactively | Remanded for resentencing; no ex post facto issue as to Jessica; overall scheme requires reevaluation of guideline range. |
| Whether the one-book rule governs multi-offense sentencing | Grouping or single treatment for offenses; argues to apply new rules across offenses | Grouping not applicable when offenses target different victims; coherence policy not controlling for each offense | One-book rule not binding here; offenses not groupable; old guidelines applicable to pre-change offenses. |
| Whether the computer-use enhancement (§2G1.3(b)(3)) should apply | Application note 4 controls; creation of Craigslist ads constitutes use of computer to entice | Note clashes with guideline; Patterson precedent questionable | Enhancement applies; guideline controls over the inconsistent note; computer use properly increased the range. |
| Whether the court properly applied the undue-influence enhancement (§2G1.3(b)(2)(B)) | Promises of future wealth and romance constitute undue influence over a minor | Enhancement applied for Jade; improper influence established. | |
| Whether the supervised-release conditions were properly stated and reasoned | Conditions ambiguous and excessive; not all imposed orally with reasons | Sentence vacated; remanded to reconsider prison term and conditions of supervised release. |
Key Cases Cited
- Bond v. United States, 134 S. Ct. 2077 (2013) (ex post facto considerations in guideline amendments)
- Peugh v. United States, 133 S. Ct. 2072 (2013) (guidelines influence sentencing for ex post facto analysis)
- Weaver v. Graham, 450 U.S. 24 (1981) (due-process-like validation of fair warning in legislative changes)
- United States v. Vallone, 752 F.3d 690 (7th Cir. 2014) (ex post facto considerations under grouping and guideline changes)
- United States v. Stephenson, 921 F.2d 438 (2d Cir. 1990) (policies on guideline coherence and uniformity)
- Stinson v. United States, 508 U.S. 36 (1993) (relation between application notes and guidelines)
- United States v. Patterson, 576 F.3d 431 (7th Cir. 2009) (application note consistency issues in Patterson; distinguished here)
- United States v. Goodwin, 717 F.3d 511 (7th Cir. 2013) (constitutional sentencing procedures; need for explicit reasoning and clarity)
- United States v. Siegel, 753 F.3d 705 (7th Cir. 2014) (requirement to articulate all conditions in the oral sentence; avoid ambiguities)
- United States v. Hallahan, 756 F.3d 962 (7th Cir. 2014) (grouping and multi-offense sentencing issues in continuing offenses)