By: Derek Hawkins//August 1, 2017//
7th Circuit Court of Appeals
Case Name: United States of America v. Marcus D. Thompson
Case No.: 16-3741
Officials: EASTERBROOK, KANNE, and ROVNER, Circuit Judges.
Focus: Court Error – Sufficiency of Plea
On September 8, 2015, a grand jury returned a two-count indictment charging him with sex trafficking of a child by force, fraud, or coercion and conspiracy to do the same in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1591(a)(1)–(2), (b)(1)–(2) and § 1594(c). He pled guilty to these crimes without a plea deal. On October 12, 2016, the district court held a sentencing hearing. Throughout the hearing, the court referenced Thompson’s presentence report, which recites the facts re- counted above. Thompson admitted that he read the report with his attorney and certified that everything in it is true, correct, and accurate. The court then accepted the report and adopted its factual findings.
Thompson appealed, raising several issues—none of which have merit. The issue is whether Thompson made a knowing and voluntary guilty plea. To address this issue, we consider “(1) the complexity of the charge; (2) the defendant’s level of intelligence, age, and education; (3) whether the defendant was represented by counsel; (4) the judge’s inquiry during the plea hearing and the defendant’s statements; and (5) the evidence proffered by the government.” United States v. Woodard, 744 F.3d 488, 495 (7th Cir. 2014) (quoting United States v. Blalock, 321 F.3d 686, 688–89 (7th Cir. 2003)). The law also requires a district court to ensure that the defendant understands his rights. Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(b). We agree that Thompson was competent to plead guilty. Although he was a high school dropout, he was intelligent enough to operate a sophisticated online prostitution scheme with fixed and variable prices, all while evading detection from authorities. These facts show that he knowingly and voluntarily pled guilty. Thus, the court committed no error in accepting his plea.
Affirmed