Court Vacates Prison Contraband Conviction on Jurisdictional Grounds

US v. Perez: Perez was incarcerated at FCI Petersburg for possessing child sex abuse material when he was found in possession of images he had made involving children engaging in sexual acts that “looked almost real.” As a result, he was charged with producing and possessing obscene visual depictions of the sexual abuse of children. At the conclusion of his bench trial, Perez argued that the Government had not proven that FCI Petersburg was “in the . . . territorial jurisdiction or possession of the United States” and, therefore, he should be acquitted. The district court disagreed, taking judicial notice that FCI Petersburg “a federal prison, falls under federal jurisdiction.”

On appeal, a divided Fourth Circuit reversed Perez’s conviction and remanded for additional proceedings. As an initial matter, the court was required to determine whether the jurisdiction hook involved was a matter to be resolved by the factfinder or the court as a question of law. The court concluded that it was mixed, with factual determinations about what occurred where being factual issue, but questions about the impact of that being legal questions for the court. While the district court did not error in that manner, the court did conclude that it erred in not doing the required three-step analysis for determining whether something is within federal jurisdiction. Because that was, ultimately, a legal question for the court to decide, the court ordered the case remanded for additional proceedings on the issue.

Judge Wynn issued a short concurring opinion, emphasizing that the fact/law issue would have been different if Perez has a jury trial. Had it been, “I doubt that we could remand this case without infringing upon Perez’s Sixth Amendment right to trial by jury.”

Judge Harris concurred in part and dissented in part, agreeing that the district court did not do the proper three-step analysis, but arguing that because the Government “did not prove facts necessary to satisfy all the elements of the criminal offense with which Perez was charged,” his conviction must be reversed.

Congrats to the Defender office in the ED Virginia on the win!