Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 90 views

    United States v. Ashlee Liebert, 4th Cir. (2014)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document summarizes a United States Court of Appeals case involving defendant Ashlee Liebert appealing her 144-month sentence for traveling interstate to engage in illicit sexual conduct with a minor. The Court of Appeals affirms the district court's application of a sentencing guideline cross-reference, finding that Liebert specifically sought qualifying sexual images of the 12-year old victim via text messages, which were found in her possession. As Liebert admitted to these facts in the district court, the Court of Appeals finds no clear error in the factual findings supporting use of the cross-reference to increase her sentence.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd

    United States v. Ashlee Liebert, 4th Cir. (2014)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    90 views3 pages
    This document summarizes a United States Court of Appeals case involving defendant Ashlee Liebert appealing her 144-month sentence for traveling interstate to engage in illicit sexual conduct with a minor. The Court of Appeals affirms the district court's application of a sentencing guideline cross-reference, finding that Liebert specifically sought qualifying sexual images of the 12-year old victim via text messages, which were found in her possession. As Liebert admitted to these facts in the district court, the Court of Appeals finds no clear error in the factual findings supporting use of the cross-reference to increase her sentence.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2014-02-07 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 13-4493

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This document summarizes a United States Court of Appeals case involving defendant Ashlee Liebert appealing her 144-month sentence for traveling interstate to engage in illicit sexual conduct with a minor. The Court of Appeals affirms the district court's application of a sentencing guideline cross-reference, finding that Liebert specifically sought qualifying sexual images of the 12-year old victim via text messages, which were found in her possession. As Liebert admitted to these facts in the district court, the Court of Appeals finds no clear error in the factual findings supporting use of the cross-reference to increase her sentence.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf
    90 views3 pages

    United States v. Ashlee Liebert, 4th Cir. (2014)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document summarizes a United States Court of Appeals case involving defendant Ashlee Liebert appealing her 144-month sentence for traveling interstate to engage in illicit sexual conduct with a minor. The Court of Appeals affirms the district court's application of a sentencing guideline cross-reference, finding that Liebert specifically sought qualifying sexual images of the 12-year old victim via text messages, which were found in her possession. As Liebert admitted to these facts in the district court, the Court of Appeals finds no clear error in the factual findings supporting use of the cross-reference to increase her sentence.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf
    You are on page 1of 3

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 13-4493

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    v.
    ASHLEE C. LIEBERT,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern
    District of West Virginia, at Huntington.
    Robert C. Chambers,
    Chief District Judge. (3:12-cr-00096-1)

    Submitted:

    January 23, 2014

    Decided:

    February 7, 2014

    Before DUNCAN, DAVIS, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Wayne D. Inge, LAW OFFICE


    for Appellant.
    R. Booth
    William
    B.
    King,
    II,
    Charleston, West Virginia,

    OF WAYNE D. INGE, Roanoke, Virginia,


    Goodwin, II, United States Attorney,
    Assistant
    United
    States
    Attorney,
    for Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Ashlee C. Liebert pled guilty to knowingly traveling
    in interstate commerce for the purpose of engaging in illicit
    sexual

    conduct

    with

    minor,

    as

    defined

    in

    18

    U.S.C.

    2423(f)(1) (2012), in violation of 18 U.S.C. 2423(b) (2012).


    On appeal, Liebert challenges his 144-month sentence alleging
    that the district court erroneously applied the cross-reference
    under U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual (USSG) 2G1.3(c)(1)
    (2012).

    For the reasons that follow, we affirm.


    After United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 (2005), we

    review a sentence for reasonableness, whether inside or outside


    the Guidelines range, and we apply a deferential abuse-ofdiscretion standard.
    (2007).
    no

    We first must ensure that the district court committed

    significant

    sentence

    Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 52

    is

    procedural

    error.

    procedurally

    Id.

    at

    51.

    reasonable,

    do

    we

    Only

    if

    evaluate

    the
    the

    substantive reasonableness of the sentence, again using an abuse


    of discretion standard of review.

    Id.; United States v. Carter,

    564 F.3d 325, 328 (4th Cir. 2009).


    courts

    application

    of

    the

    When considering a district

    Sentencing

    Guidelines,

    we

    review

    factual findings for clear error and legal conclusions de novo.


    United States v. Mehta, 594 F.3d 277, 281 (4th Cir. 2010).
    Section
    provides

    that

    2G1.3(c)(1)
    2G2.1

    of

    applies
    2

    by

    the

    Sentencing

    cross-reference

    Guidelines
    [i]f

    the

    offense involved causing, transporting, permitting, or offering


    or seeking by notice or advertisement, a minor to engage in
    sexually explicit conduct for the purpose of producing a visual
    depiction

    of

    2G1.3(c)(l)

    such

    is

    conduct.

    to

    be

    USSG

    construed

    2G1.3(c)(1).

    broadly.

    USSG

    Section

    2G1.3,

    comment. (n.5).
    We find no error in the district courts application
    of

    the

    cross-reference

    and

    rely

    on

    its

    finding

    that

    Liebert

    specifically sought qualifying images from his twelve-year-old


    victim

    via

    possession.

    texting,

    ten

    courts

    reference.

    which

    were

    found

    in

    Lieberts

    Indeed, Liebert, through counsel, admitted as much

    to the district court.


    district

    of

    Thus, we find no clear error in the

    factual

    findings

    Mehta, 594 F.3d at 281.

    supporting

    the

    cross-

    Accordingly, Lieberts sole

    claim on appeal is without merit, and we affirm his sentence.


    We

    dispense

    contentions

    with
    are

    oral

    argument

    adequately

    because

    presented

    in

    the

    facts

    and

    the

    materials

    legal
    before

    this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

    AFFIRMED

    You might also like