United States v. Stahlman

Citation934 F.3d 1199
Decision Date19 August 2019
Docket NumberNos. 17-14387,18-12866,s. 17-14387
Parties UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. John David STAHLMAN, Defendant-Appellant.
CourtUnited States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (11th Circuit)

934 F.3d 1199

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
John David STAHLMAN, Defendant-Appellant.

Nos. 17-14387
18-12866

United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.

August 19, 2019


Linda Julin McNamara, Yvette Rhodes, U.S. Attorney Service - Middle District of Florida, U.S. Attorney's Office, TAMPA, FL, for Plaintiff - Appellee.

Rosemary Cakmis, Donna Lee Elm, Stephen John Langs, Karla Mariel Reyes, Federal Public Defender's Office, ORLANDO, FL, for Defendant - Appellant.

Before JORDAN, GRANT and HULL, Circuit Judges.

HULL, Circuit Judge:

After a jury trial, John David Stahlman appeals his conviction and 292-month sentence for attempting to entice a minor to engage in sexual activity. On appeal, Stahlman argues that the district court erred: (1) in excluding the testimony of his proposed expert, Dr. Chris Carr; (2) in admitting the case agent’s lay opinion testimony and in denying Stahlman’s motion for a mistrial on that ground; (3) in denying his motions for judgment of acquittal; (4) in imposing a sentencing enhancement for obstruction of justice; and (5) in denying his post-trial motion for a new trial. After review, and with the benefit of oral argument, we affirm.

We begin by recounting the trial evidence about Stahlman’s offense conduct, next review the procedural history, and then address Stahlman’s claims in turn.

I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND

After two months of sordid email exchanges with a father who was offering his 11-year-old daughter for sex, Stahlman drove to a parking lot to meet up and live out his self-described "daddy/daughter fantasy." Unfortunately for Stahlman, the "father" was an undercover agent with the Federal Bureau of Investigation ("FBI"), and the "daughter" did not exist. At trial, Stahlman testified and told the jury that he believed all along that he was acting out a role-playing sexual game with other adults—that he never intended to have sex with an actual minor, just an adult pretending to be a minor. The jury found him guilty.

Stahlman’s sordid conduct began on November 10, 2016, when he posted an ad on the "Casual Encounters" section of the "Personals" page on Craigslist entitled

934 F.3d 1206

"Daddy/daughter fantasy," with a picture of a girl laying on a bed wearing only underwear and a camisole. In the ad, Stahlman wrote: "I am a married white guy looking for a young ‘looking’ girl to play out some fantasies with me." Stahlman added: "I have a daughter but wouldn’t dare defile her. So I’d like to chat at first to fill this need, and maybe, just maybe move to physical pleasure." Stahlman closed the ad by requesting that interested persons contact him via email or the instant messaging application Kik and stating, "Hope to hear from you, honey."

On November 16, 2016, Special Agent Rodney Hyre came across Stahlman’s Craigslist ad while working in an undercover capacity to identify persons who might be trying to sexually exploit children. Agent Hyre is the coordinator of the FBI’s Violent Crimes Against Children Task Force. Agent Hyre estimated the age of the girl pictured in Stahlman’s ad to be between 10 and 12 years’ old and suspected from "the nature of the advertisement" that Stahlman might be someone who was "attempting to find a child to sexually exploit." Responding to the ad, Agent Hyre began an undercover conversation with Stahlman. The conversation lasted from mid-November 2016 through the end of January 2017. During that time, Stahlman and Agent Hyre exchanged 125 emails and 22 Kik messages discussing plans for Stahlman to meet and engage in sexual activity with Hyre’s fictional 11-year-old daughter.

In his initial response to Stahlman’s post, Agent Hyre stated he was a straight, single father of an 11-year-old daughter. Hyre indicated that he felt "the same way" Stahlman did and said "HMU [hit me up] if this interests you." Stahlman quickly responded: "Defin[i]tely interested. Depends on what you want to do?" Agent Hyre asked about Stahlman’s daughter. Stahlman responded that she was nine years’ old and reiterated that he "wouldn’t defile [his] little girl," but said, "I think I would play with someone else’s."1 In another email, however, Stahlman stated that he fantasized about his own daughter "[i]n the right moments[,] when she is changing and I catch a glimpse or when we are tickle fighting and hands go places." Agent Hyre explained that, in this context "tickle fighting" or the "tickle game" meant "where people interested in children this way will pretend they’re tickling the child to make them laugh, and they will let their hands drift into inappropriate places on the child to test the boundaries of the child."

As the conversation progressed, Agent Hyre indicated to Stahlman that his 11-year-old daughter had engaged in sexual activities with other adult men before. Stahlman stated that he "would like to act out [his] fantasies" and would like to "play" with Hyre’s 11-year-old. Stahlman asked Agent Hyre: "So what would I have to do to ... ‘qualify’ myself the opportunity to meet your lovely little lady?" Agent Hyre replied that Stahlman would "have to be okay with me watching," and Stahlman agreed that he would be "totally ok" with that.

Over the course of their conversations, Stahlman made several statements describing the types of sexual activities he would like to engage in with Agent Hyre’s 11-year-old daughter. Among other things, Stahlman stated: "I just envisioned licking your daughter’s pussy as she slept and you filming it"; "I’d defin[i]tely want to eat her pussy and watch her suck my cock. I’d probably want to eat her little ass too"; "[I]f it led to sex I’d be cool with

934 F.3d 1207

that too but I’m for sure into oral play"; "I would like to see her undress, or undress her myself and just kiss and play. Maybe do a little oral on eachother. Then see where it leads"; "I think I would want sex, maybe even anal"; "[C]ould her and I start with a shower[?]"; and "We could explore eachother’s bodies and it not be all that sexual. Then be all clean for the fun part." Stahlman also asked Agent Hyre for pictures of his 11-year-old, and Agent Hyre sent him a picture of a fellow law enforcement officer when she was 12 or 13. Stahlman commented that she was "a little older than [he] pictured, which is quite alright," and that "she looks very cute and sexy."

Stahlman attempted to set up a meeting with Agent Hyre and his 11-year-old in mid-November while Stahlman’s wife was supposed to be out of town, but the plan was cancelled when Stahlman’s wife insisted that he travel with her. A bit later in November, Stahlman again discussed plans to meet Agent Hyre’s 11-year-old, but that plan likewise fell through when Stahlman was unable to get away from his wife. In early December 2016, Agent Hyre reached out to Stahlman again and asked, "Hey man you still interested in playing or should I delete you?" Stahlman replied: "Go ahead and delete me. My availability has just dwindled lately. It’s probably not gonna happen. Thanks for the opportunity." When Agent Hyre inquired whether Stahlman might "want to later" or had "just changed [his] mind about the whole thing," Stahlman replied that he had not changed his mind, but could not find the time to set up a meeting.

The conversation between Stahlman and Agent Hyre lapsed through the rest of December 2016 and into January 2017, but picked back up when Agent Hyre contacted Stahlman again in late January. In a January 23, 2017 email, Agent Hyre stated: "Last we talked you said you hadnt changed your mind[.] Just couldnt find the time, that still true[?]" Stahlman confirmed "that’s still true," then asked "Are you two free a week from now? Next Monday?" Agent Hyre responded that he and his daughter would be available, and over the next few days, Hyre and Stahlman made plans for their meeting.

Ultimately, they decided to meet at 8:30 a.m. on Monday, January 30, 2017 in the parking lot of a Gander Mountain sporting goods store in Lake Mary, Florida. Agent Hyre proposed that the two men meet each other first, then go to meet Agent Hyre’s 11-year-old, and Stahlman agreed. Stahlman told Agent Hyre he would be driving a "[w]hite VW." Among other things, Stahlman asked Agent Hyre multiple times whether he should bring condoms, whether he could shower with Agent Hyre’s daughter before engaging in sexual activity with her, whether she "like[d] kissing," and whether Agent Hyre would be filming or taking pictures of their activities. On the day before the meeting, Stahlman told Agent Hyre "I am really looking forward to Monday," and "I can’t wait." On the morning of January 30, 2017, about an hour before they were scheduled to meet, Stahlman emailed: "Tik Tock. It’s almost time."

The morning of their scheduled meeting, January 30, 2017, Stahlman drove to the Gander Mountain parking lot in Lake Mary from his home in Longwood, Florida. Stahlman arrived at approximately 8:25 a.m. in his white VW, wearing a green Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles t-shirt. Stahlman exited his vehicle and approached the undercover agent (not Agent Hyre) who was playing the role of the father of the 11-year-old. At that point, Agent Hyre, who was watching from a surveillance vehicle, approached and arrested Stahlman.

934 F.3d 1208

...

To continue reading

Request your trial
21 cases
  • Kilpatrick v. Commonwealth
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Virginia
    • May 4, 2021
    ...actually state an opinion on [the] ultimate issue, and instead leaves this inference for the jury to draw.’ " United States v. Stahlman, 934 F.3d 1199, 1220 (11th Cir. 2019) (quoting United States v. Augustin, 661 F.3d 1105, 1123 (11th Cir. 2011) ). To the extent other jurisdictions have re......
  • United States v. Castaneda
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (11th Circuit)
    • May 19, 2021
    ...See, e.g., Deason, 965 F.3d at 1256 ; United States v. Gillis, 938 F.3d 1181, 1187–89 (11th Cir. 2019) ; United States v. Stahlman, 934 F.3d 1199, 1205–07 (11th Cir. 2019) ; United States v. Jockisch, 857 F.3d 1122, 1124–25 (11th Cir. 2017).Given that the conduct of the government agents in......
  • United States v. Singer
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (11th Circuit)
    • June 26, 2020
    ...the defendant's] conduct as criminal such that his acts as a whole strongly corroborate the required culpability." United States v. Stahlman , 934 F.3d 1199, 1225 (11th Cir.) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted), cert. denied. , ––– U.S. ––––, 140 S. Ct. 530, 205 L.Ed.2d 347 (201......
  • United States v. Clark
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (11th Circuit)
    • April 28, 2022
    ...the firearm was manufactured in Arizona, where the marking on the barrel clearly displayed "Prescott, AZ." See United States v. Stahlman , 934 F.3d 1199, 1229 (11th Cir. 2019) (explaining that an agent's prior discipline would not have changed the overall outcome of the trial where the evid......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles
  • Perjury
    • United States
    • American Criminal Law Review No. 59-3, July 2022
    • July 1, 2022
    ...to provide false testimony, rather than as a result of confusion, mistake, or faulty memory.”); see, e.g. , United States v. Stahlman, 934 F.3d 1199, 1227 (11th Cir. 2019) (same); United States v. Nagell, 911 F.3d 23, 29 (1st Cir. 2018) (same). 56. See Montano v. City of Chicago, 535 F.3d 5......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT