## Facts

- Irma Martinez, a Philippine national from a poor family, came to the United States as a young adult after being recruited through the family of Elnora Calimlim.
- Martinez entered on a visa obtained through a misrepresentation about accompanying a person for medical treatment; her authorized stay required periodic departure and reentry.
- After arrival at the Calimlims’ home in Wisconsin, the Calimlims took her passport, claimed she was illegally present almost immediately, and told her she owed reimbursement for travel costs.
- For about 19 years, Martinez worked as a live-in domestic worker with hours commonly from early morning until late evening, seven days a week; her tasks expanded to include work related to cars, real estate, and medical offices.
- The Calimlims maintained strict control and isolation: limiting her ability to leave, directing concealment during travel, restricting communications, and instructing the children not to discuss her with outsiders.
- The Calimlims used repeated false statements and threats tied to immigration consequences—arrest, jail, and deportation—if her presence were discovered.
- Martinez was not paid a direct wage; over the years, the Calimlims sent relatively small amounts to her parents while receiving extensive labor at minimal cost.
- Federal agents found Martinez in the home after an anonymous tip and search in 2004.

## Issues

1. Whether 18 U.S.C. § 1589 (forced labor) is unconstitutionally overbroad or vague, particularly as applied to nonphysical coercion and immigration-related threats.
2. Whether the forced-labor jury instructions improperly permitted conviction based on lawful or “innocent” conduct or failed to require wrongful intent.
3. Whether the evidence was sufficient to prove harboring an alien for private financial gain under 8 U.S.C. § 1324.
4. Whether the district court erred at sentencing by declining certain Sentencing Guidelines enhancements, including for additional felony conduct, vulnerable victim, and use of minors.

## Decision

- The court affirmed the defendants’ convictions for forced labor, harboring for private financial gain, and conspiracy.
- The court held that § 1589 was constitutional as applied and was neither vague nor overbroad on these facts.
- The court upheld the jury instructions, concluding they properly required knowing procurement of labor through prohibited coercive means and intent to leave the victim with no realistic alternative but to work.
- The court found sufficient evidence that the defendants concealed and shielded Martinez to maintain access to her labor and thus harbored her for private financial gain.
- On the government’s cross-appeal, the court reversed the sentences and remanded for resentencing because the district court failed to apply applicable enhancements under the Guidelines.

## Legal Principles

- Forced labor under 18 U.S.C. § 1589 reaches coercion accomplished through threats of serious harm, a scheme intended to make a person believe harm will follow noncompliance, or abuse or threatened abuse of law or legal process; physical force is not required.
- A vagueness challenge fails as applied where the statute gives fair notice that a defendant’s conduct—deception, isolation, and immigration-based threats used to obtain labor—falls within the statute’s prohibitions and does not invite arbitrary enforcement on those facts.
- Proper forced-labor instructions must require proof that defendants knowingly obtained labor by prohibited coercion and acted with the intent to cause the victim to believe continued labor was compelled.
- “Harboring” under 8 U.S.C. § 1324 may be supported by evidence of concealment and efforts to prevent detection, and “private financial gain” may be shown by obtaining substantial economic benefit from below-market or unpaid labor.
- Under U.S.S.G. § 2H4.1, enhancements may apply where additional felonies occur in connection with forced labor and where the victim is unusually vulnerable; applying such adjustments is not improper double counting when they address offense features not fully captured by the base level.

## Conclusion

The Seventh Circuit upheld convictions arising from a long-term scheme to obtain domestic labor through isolation, deception, and immigration-related threats, rejected constitutional and instructional challenges to § 1589, found sufficient evidence of harboring for financial gain, and remanded for resentencing to apply appropriate Guidelines enhancements.


United States v. Calimlim, 538 F.3d 706 (7th Cir. 2008)