Epstein Secrets

ation of federal law. This argument is foreclosed by our deci- sions in United States v. Helder, 452 F.3d 751 (8th Cir.2006), and United States v. Hicks, 457 FM 838 (8th Cir2006). In Heftier, we concluded that an actual minor victim is not required for the crime of attempted enticement under § 2422

t 756. In Hicks, we extended that reasoning to § 2423(b)'s prohibition of travel with intent to engage in illicit sexual conduct. 457 F.3d at 841. Helder and Hicks control here, and apply with equal force to the third statute under which Spurlock was convicted: attempt to know- ingly transfer obscen

tual minor must be involved, the govern- ment proved no violation of federal law. This argument is foreclosed by our deci- sions in United States v. Helder, 452 F.3d 751 (8th Cir.2006), and United States v. Hicks, 457 FM 838 (8th Cir2006). In Heftier, we concluded that an actual minor victim is not r

20 years earlier. Denied. 2422(b); 2423(b) No Information 65 EFTA00224199 COURT CASES FACILITY FACTS/COMMUNICATION CHARGE W.D. Mo. U.S. I Hicks, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS Internet Defendant alleged to have used Internet & telephone to entice a minor; traveled to engage t in sex ac. 2422(b)

d no violation of 2422(b) & 2423 because no actual minor; court agrees and defendant's motion to dismiss is granted based on Showed up at meeting Helder. U.S. I Helder, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS Internet No information available. Court held that 2422(b) requires actual 2422(b) Sting 38874 (W.D. Mo

belief that she was 14 yrs-old. 29 EFTA01729513 COURT. . .. . . , • - S ' -- ,S2W114117 - ;FJQCTS'IC0MMUlite4OO,.; •,': -03ARGE U.S. v. Hicks, 457 F.3d 838 (8ih Cir. 2006), overruled Helder, 452 F.3d 751 Internet defendant initiated Internet conversation with "13 yr-old" followed by t

ct. Defendant claimed no violation of 2422(b) & 2423 because no actual minor; court agrees and defendant's motion to dismiss is granted based on Helder. 2422(b); 2423(b) Not Consummated • • Showed up at meeting Sting 64 EFTA01729548 egIllit 1 CASES, --- Fs ILI - -- ' enc: , , • . -CR

29 EFTA00079442 -;"COHRT; C.ASES C6:”14.111•47.Cia.:e. - :finik 4 ;acIale.40,... - ,,, - ' FACILITY FACZS/COMMUNICATION CHARGE U.S. v. Hicks. Internet defendant initiated Internet conversation 2422(b); 2423(b) 457 F.3d 838 (8th Cir. 2006), overruled Helder,452 F.3d 751 Stine with "

ct. Defendant claimed no violation of 2422(b) & 2423 because no actual minor; court agrees and defendant's motion to dismiss is granted based on Helder. 2422(b); 2423(b) Not Consummated Showed up at meeting Sting 64 EFTA00079477 COURT CASES , FAC:ILITY FACTS/COMMUNICATION CHARGE U.S. v.