U.S. v. Christophel

In prosecution on charge of defendant knowingly attempting to persuade, induce or entice minor to engage in sexual activity under 18 USC section 2422(b), Dist. Ct. did not err in giving jury instruction that told jury that government does not have to prove that defendant intended to have sex with minor, just that he intended to entice minor to have sex. While defendant argued that said instruction improperly criminalized acts that unintentionally led minor to agree to have sex with him, Ct. of Appeals found that said instruction, when read in conjunction with other instructions was not misstatement of law, and was otherwise shorthand reference to specific conduct outlined in statute. Also, Ct. of Appeals held that defendant was not prejudiced by said instruction, where his multiple texts with victim, his plans to come to victim to engage in sex and his willingness to travel two hours to victim’s house established that he had requisite intent to persuade, induce or entice victim under section 2422(b).