Jury Instructions

Listen to this article

7^th Circuit Court of Appeals

Case Name: United States of America v. Christopher Christophel

Case No.: 23-1542

Officials: Rovner, Brennan, and Pryor, Circuit Judges.

Focus: Jury Instructions

Christophel was found guilty of knowingly attempting to persuade, induce, or entice a minor into sexual activity, based on his online interactions with an undercover federal agent posing as a 15-year-old girl. Christophel appealed his conviction, arguing that the trial court’s jury instruction misstated the elements of the offense.

The central question on appeal revolved around a specific jury instruction’s language, which indicated that the government didn’t need to prove Christophel intended to engage in sex with the minor, but only that he intended to entice the minor into such activity. Christophel argued that this instruction encompassed a broader range of behavior than what the statute prohibited.

The Seventh Circuit determined that when considered as a whole, the jury instruction accurately reflected the law. While the phrase “causing … assent” might imply unintentional actions out of context, within the entirety of the instruction, it referred to the specific conduct outlined in the initial paragraph: knowingly taking a significant step with the intent to commit the offense of enticing a minor.

Even if the instruction could have been more explicit, the court concluded that Christophel wasn’t prejudiced by any potential misinterpretation. Given the substantial evidence of Christophel’s intent, any perceived error would have been inconsequential.

Affirmed.

Decided 02/14/24

Full Text