Edgar Joe Searcy appeals his conviction and sentence for using the internet to persuade a minor to engage in unlawful sexual activity, violating 18 U.S.C. § 2422(b). The appeal centers on whether this violation constitutes a "crime of violence" for determining career offender status under U.S.S.G. § 4B1.1. An undercover officer posed as the father of a thirteen-year-old girl in an AOL chatroom, where Searcy, using the screen name “OBBESSEDDAD11,” expressed interest in sexual activities with minors and suggested a face-to-face meeting. After his arrest, investigators found images of minors and child pornography on Searcy's computer. Searcy initially contested the government's evidence but later accepted a plea agreement. The pre-sentence report assigned him an adjusted offense level of 23, recommending career offender status due to two prior convictions for crimes against children. This enhanced his offense level to 29, adjusted to 26 for acceptance of responsibility. The district court categorized his criminal history as VI due to career offender status, resulting in a recommended sentence range of 120 to 150 months. Ultimately, the court sentenced Searcy to 180 months, the statutory maximum, citing the similarities between his prior convictions and the current offense, marking this classification issue as one of first impression in the Eleventh Circuit.
The interpretation of statutes is reviewed de novo, as established in United States v. Murrell. A defendant qualifies as a “career offender” under the Guidelines if they are at least eighteen years old at the time of the offense, the offense is a felony categorized as a crime of violence or a controlled substance offense, and the defendant has at least two prior felony convictions of the same types. Searcy contends he was improperly classified as a career offender because his offense under 18 U.S.C. § 2422(b) does not constitute a crime of violence, as it lacks an element of force or violence. The definition of a “crime of violence” includes offenses that involve the use or threatened use of physical force or conduct that presents a serious risk of physical injury. Searcy argues that the least culpable conduct for a § 2422(b) violation—persuasion or enticement—does not inherently pose such a risk. The government counters that the court correctly determined that § 2422(b) constitutes a crime of violence due to the potential risk of physical injury to minors involved. The analysis focuses on whether physical force is an element of the offense; since persuasion does not require physical force, § 2422(b) is deemed not to include that element.
The district court determined that 18 U.S.C. § 2422(b), which criminalizes the enticement of minors for sexual activity, constitutes a "crime of violence" under U.S.S.G. § 4B1.2(a)(2). This conclusion was supported by precedent from the Sixth and Tenth Circuits, which found similar statutes also classified as crimes of violence due to the inherent risks of physical injury they pose to minors. The Sixth Circuit, in United States v. Smith, ruled that violations of § 2422(a) involve serious potential risks of injury, asserting that any felony related to the sexual exploitation of juveniles is inherently violent. Similarly, the Tenth Circuit affirmed that § 2422(b) qualifies as a crime of violence for victim restitution purposes under 18 U.S.C. § 16 and for firearm-related offenses under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c), emphasizing the substantial risk of physical force in cases involving sexual crimes against minors. The district court expressed that, although not bound by these circuit decisions, the reasoning was compelling, especially considering the Sentencing Commission's definitions approved by Congress, which support the classification of § 2422(b) as a crime of violence for career offender designation.
The use of the Internet to entice a minor into sexual activity poses a significant risk of physical harm to the minor, aligning with the definition of a "crime of violence" under U.S.S.G. § 4B1.2. Legislative history supports this classification, tracing back to the inclusion of § 2422(b) in the Telecommunications Act of 1996, which aimed to address child endangerment online. The 1998 amendment to Title 18, under the "Protection of Children from Sexual Predators Act," increased the maximum prison sentence for violations of § 2422(b) from ten to fifteen years due to a rise in cases of severe crimes against children, including kidnapping and sexual abuse. After evaluating the relevant statutes and judicial interpretations, the district court's determination that § 2422(b) is a crime of violence for career offender designation is upheld, confirming that any attempt to persuade or induce a minor into illegal sexual activity inherently risks physical injury. The decision to classify Searcy as a career offender under U.S.S.G. § 4B1.1 is affirmed.
