Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

Sentencing Guidelines – Enhancement

By: Derek Hawkins//November 12, 2019//

Sentencing Guidelines – Enhancement

By: Derek Hawkins//November 12, 2019//

Listen to this article

7th Circuit Court of Appeals

Case Name: United States of America v. Darin Kaufmann

Case No.: 18-2742

Officials: EASTERBROOK, KANNE, and BRENNAN, Circuit Judges.

Focus: Sentencing Guidelines – Enhancement

For certain federal crimes involving sexual exploitation of minors, a federal statute— 18 U.S.C. § 2252(b)—increases the mandatory minimum sentence when the defendant has a prior conviction “under the laws of any State relating to,” among other things, “possession … of child pornography.” Darin Kaufmann pled guilty to two federal crimes involving sexual exploitation of a minor.

The district court imposed an enhanced mandatory minimum sentence under § 2252(b) because Kaufmann has prior convictions for possession of child pornography under an Indiana statute. Kaufmann challenged his sentence, arguing that his prior state convictions do not support a § 2252(b) enhancement because the Indiana statute of his convictions criminalized conduct broader than the federal version of possession of child pornography.

In United States v. Kraemer, we held that a § 2252(b) enhancement does not require the state statute of conviction to be the same as or narrower than the analogous federal law. 933 F.3d 675 (7th Cir. 2019). Rather, the words “relating to” in § 2252(b) expand the range of enhancement-triggering convictions. Id. at 679–83. Under Kraemer, Kaufmann’s Indiana convictions are ones “relating to … possession … of child pornography” and thus support the mandatory minimum enhancement. Adhering to our decision in Kraemer, we affirm Kaufmann’s sentence.

Affirmed

Full Text


Derek A Hawkins is trademark corporate counsel for Harley-Davidson. Hawkins oversees the prosecution and maintenance of the Harley-Davidson’s international trademark portfolio in emerging markets.

Polls

Should Wisconsin Supreme Court rules be amended so attorneys can't appeal license revocation after 5 years?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Legal News

See All Legal News

WLJ People

Sea all WLJ People

Opinion Digests