## Facts

- Ryan Douglas Jennings, age 24, traveled on an overnight flight from San Diego to Washington, D.C. (Dulles).
- A 13-year-old girl traveled with her 11-year-old brother and sat next to Jennings.
- Jennings initiated contact with the children at the gate, then sat next to the girl during the flight despite having an assigned seat several rows back.
- Jennings told the girl he moved because he thought she was “beautiful.”
- The girl later reported that during the flight Jennings repeatedly touched her buttocks, inner thighs, and genital area through her clothing and made remarks that made her afraid to seek help.
- A passenger observed Jennings leaning in close to the girl and alerted a flight attendant; Jennings was moved to another seat.
- Minutes later, the girl sat by another passenger and spontaneously stated that Jennings had been groping her throughout the night; she appeared visibly shocked and upset.
- After landing, Jennings approached the girl again; she began crying and told another passenger that he had touched her buttocks and legs.
- Flight crew detained Jennings until security arrived; Jennings was arrested and charged with abusive sexual contact with a minor under 18 U.S.C. § 2244(a)(3).
- A jury convicted Jennings in the Eastern District of Virginia; he appealed evidentiary rulings and jury instructions.

## Issues

1. Whether the district court improperly admitted passengers’ testimony recounting the victim’s statements as excited utterances under Fed. R. Evid. 803(2).
2. Whether 18 U.S.C. § 2244(a)(3) requires proof that the defendant knew the victim was under 16 years old.
3. Whether the district court abused its discretion by giving a deliberate-ignorance (willful blindness) jury instruction.

## Decision

- The Fourth Circuit affirmed the conviction.
- The court held the victim’s statements to two passengers were admissible as excited utterances because they were made while she remained under the stress of the alleged assault, as shown by timing, spontaneity, and emotional state.
- The court held § 2244(a)(3) imposes no scienter requirement as to the victim’s age; the government need not prove the defendant knew the victim was under 16.
- The court held the deliberate-ignorance instruction was within the trial court’s discretion because the evidence supported an inference that Jennings consciously avoided recognizing facts indicating wrongdoing.

## Legal Principles

- A statement qualifies as an excited utterance under Fed. R. Evid. 803(2) when it relates to a startling event and is made while the declarant remains under the stress of that event; elapsed time is relevant but not dispositive.
- For abusive sexual contact with a minor under 18 U.S.C. § 2244(a)(3) (by reference to § 2243(a)), the victim’s age operates as a strict-liability element unless Congress expressly requires a mental state as to age.
- A deliberate-ignorance (willful blindness) instruction may be given when evidence permits a finding that the defendant consciously avoided confirming facts indicative of criminal conduct; appellate review is for abuse of discretion.

## Conclusion

The Fourth Circuit upheld Jennings’s conviction, concluding that the child victim’s post-incident statements were properly admitted as excited utterances, that § 2244(a)(3) does not require proof the defendant knew the victim’s age, and that the trial court permissibly instructed the jury on deliberate ignorance.


United States v. Jennings, 496 F.3d 344 (4th Cir. 2007)