United States v. Vargas-Cordon
2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 16606
| 2d Cir. | 2013Background
- Vargas-Cordon, Guatemalan citizen, transported his 15-year-old niece Jaire from Guatemala to New Jersey/New York area after a sexual relationship began in Guatemala.
- He paid a smuggler to bring Jaire into the United States and used a fake passport; Jaire was detained at the California border and later relocated to Virginia foster care.
- Jaire remained in frequent contact with Vargas-Cordon; he visited her in Virginia and New Jersey, and they had sexual relations in multiple states.
- Trial involved Counts 1–3: transporting a minor for illegal sexual activity (2423(a)); transporting an unlawfully present alien (1324(a)(1)(A)(ii)); harboring an unlawfully present alien (1324(a)(1)(A)(iii).
- District court gave a supplemental Allen charge after a note of disagreement and a modified instruction on harboring; cross-examination of Jaire was limited by the court.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of the 2423(a) evidence | Vargas-Cordon argues insufficient intent to commit unlawful sexual activity. | Vargas-Cordon contends insufficient evidence of dominants motives; no direct intent required. | Sufficient circumstantial evidence supported intent; conviction affirmed. |
| Allen charge coerciveness | Vargas-Cordon argues the traditional Allen charge was unduly coercive. | State argues charge appropriate; context shows no coercion. | No abuse of discretion; charge not coercive given circumstances. |
| Harboring under 1324(a)(1)(A)(iii) | Harboring requires concealment or evading detection. | District court instruction acceptable given Kim and context. | Harboring as charged satisfied; district court’s instruction was proper when viewed as a whole. |
| Limitation of cross-examination of the victim (Count 2) | Restriction of questions about permission to stay prejudiced mens rea. | Rulings properly limit evidence; no reversible error. | No retrial; rulings not prejudicial under the record. |
Key Cases Cited
- Allen v. United States, 164 U.S. 492 (U.S. 1896) (classic Allen charge framework; minority Persuasion guidance)
- Smalls v. Batista, 191 F.3d 272 (2d Cir. 1999) (coercive potential of Allen charge analyzed)
- Crispo v. United States, 306 F.3d 71 (2d Cir. 2002) (Allen charge review standard often contextual)
- Lowenfield v. Phelps, 484 U.S. 231 (U.S. 1988) (contextual review of jury instructions for coercion)
- Spears v. Greiner, 459 F.3d 200 (2d Cir. 2006) (caution in using traditional Allen charges)
- Hynes, 424 F.2d 754 (1st Cir. 1970) (upholding Allen charge in similar context)
- Kim v. United States, 193 F.3d 567 (2d Cir. 1999) (definition of harboring as facilitating stay and avoiding detection)
- Firpo v. United States, 261 F.2d 850 (2d Cir. 1919) (historical harboring concept in early statute)