## Facts

- Jerry Penton showed A.K., a minor child, a child-pornography video depicting a minor female engaging in sexual conduct with an adult man.
- Immediately after showing A.K. the video, Penton removed A.K.’s clothing.
- Penton then sexually molested A.K. while simultaneously sexually stimulating himself.
- The United States charged Penton under provisions added by the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006 for providing child pornography to a minor for the purpose of inducing the minor to engage in illegal sexual conduct (and related attempt theory).
- A jury convicted Penton, and the district court sentenced him to 48 months’ (four years’) imprisonment.
- Penton appealed to the Eleventh Circuit, arguing the evidence was insufficient to prove the required purpose/intent to “induce” the minor to engage in illegal sexual conduct.
- Penton also challenged the district court’s sentencing treatment of the offense under the Walsh Act’s penalty scheme.
- The Eleventh Circuit reviewed the trial evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict and considered whether the district court committed reversible legal error at sentencing.

## Issues

1. Whether the evidence was sufficient for a reasonable jury to find beyond a reasonable doubt that Penton provided child pornography to a minor for the purpose of inducing the minor to engage in illegal sexual conduct.
2. Whether the district court erred in applying the Walsh Act’s statutory penalty provisions to Penton’s conviction.

## Decision

- The Eleventh Circuit affirmed Penton’s conviction and 48-month sentence.
- The court held that the evidence permitted a rational jury to infer Penton’s purpose to induce illegal sexual conduct from the close timing and nature of his actions: showing the child-pornography video and then immediately molesting the child.
- The court rejected Penton’s sufficiency challenge, concluding the jury could find the intent element proved beyond a reasonable doubt based on the totality of the circumstances.
- The court found no reversible error in the district court’s application of the statutory sentencing provisions to Penton’s offense.

## Legal Principles

- A sufficiency-of-the-evidence challenge is evaluated by viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the government and asking whether any rational trier of fact could find the essential elements beyond a reasonable doubt.
- A jury may infer intent from circumstantial evidence, including the defendant’s conduct before, during, and immediately after the charged act.
- For the Walsh Act offense at issue, the government must prove that the defendant provided child pornography to a minor with the purpose of inducing the minor to engage in sexual activity that constitutes a criminal offense.
- On appeal, courts generally defer to the jury’s credibility determinations and reasonable inferences drawn from the evidence.
- Statutory sentencing questions are reviewed for legal error, and a sentence will be affirmed absent reversible error affecting the lawful sentencing range or the validity of the sentence imposed.

## Conclusion

United States v. Penton affirmed Jerry Penton’s jury conviction and four-year prison sentence for providing a child-pornography video to a minor for the purpose of inducing illegal sexual conduct. The Eleventh Circuit held that the jury could reasonably infer the required intent from Penton’s showing of the child-pornography video and his immediate molestation of the child, and it found no reversible error in the district court’s application of the applicable Walsh Act penalty provisions.


United States v. Penton, 380 Fed. Appx. 818 (2010)