U.S. v. Norwood

Record contained sufficient evidence to support defendant’s conviction on charge of attempted transportation of minor across state lines with intent that 15-year old victim engage in prostitution, where: (1) defendant met victim in Indiana gas station, subsequently took out Backpage ad offering victim’s sexual services to Wisconsin clients and stayed with victim in Illinois border-town hotel; (2) cell-phone data indicated defendant’s and victim’s movements in both Wisconsin and Illinois, as well as existence of phone and text messages from Wisconsin individuals responding to said ad; and (3) victim made statements in medical records confirming that she had sexual encounters with clients, as well as defendant. Also, although victim did not testify at trial, admission of her redacted statements to nurse regarding number of sexual encounters with “unknown” males and with defendant during time she spent with defendant did not violate Confrontation Clause, where: (1) victim’s sexual assault examination by nurse served both medical and investigative purpose; (2) govt. redacted defendant’s name from said statements; (3) remaining statements concerned victim’s description of what happened to her during time she spent with defendant; and (4) said statements were highly relevant to determine best course of medical treatment, and thus were not testimonial in nature. Dist. Ct. also did not err in admitting recorded jail call between defendant and third-party, during which defendant stated that he was “pimping” girl to whom he had given cocaine, since jury could properly conclude that defendant was referring to victim in charged offense.