United States v. Daron Lee Jungers

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• concluding that Federal statute applied to those who attempted to purchase sex from minors, and reversing judgments of acquittal in Jungers I and Bonestroo
• concluding that use of passive voice in section 1591 “re‐ flects ‘agnoticism … about who’ causes the child to engage in the commercial sex act” (quoting Watson v. United States, 552 U.S. 74, 80 (2007)
• concluding that use of passive voice in section 1591 “reflects ‘agnosticism ... about who’ causes the child to engage in the commercial sex act” (quoting Watson v. United States, 552 U.S. 74, 80, 128 S.Ct 579, 169 L.Ed.2d 472 (2007))
• rejecting sufficiency challenge where defendant attempted to “obtain” a minor by attempting to get the minor “alone . . . in a room”
• “In many, if not all cases, the commercial sex act is still in the future at the time the purchaser ... [is] in violation of § 1591.”
• “In many, if not all cases, the commercial sex act is still in the future at the time the purchaser . . . traffics a child in violation of § 1591.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).