United States v. Cortes-Meza
United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
411 F. App’x 284 (2011)
- Written by Eric Miller, JD
Facts
Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) uncovered an Atlanta-based human-trafficking operation in which Mexican girls and young women were lured into the United States with promises of good jobs only to be forced into prostitution. The women were subject to frequent beatings and physical abuse, particularly in response to noncompliance with orders. Francisco Cortes-Meza, Juan Cortes-Meza, Amador Cortes-Meza, and three others were indicted by a federal grand jury on 34 charges. Francisco pleaded guilty to commercial sex trafficking and was sentenced to 240 months in prison by the district court. Juan pleaded guilty to commercial sex trafficking and importation of a minor for immoral purposes, for which he was given concurrent sentences of 200 months and 120 months. Francisco’s and Juan’s sentences exceeded the upper limit of the range set forth in the federal sentencing guidelines. The judge, who did not provide notice of the possibility of above-guideline sentences, said that he exceeded the range due to the morally outrageous nature of the crimes. Francisco and Juan appealed the court’s failure to provide notice of an intent to depart from the guidelines. The United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit granted certiorari.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Per curiam)
What to do next…
Here's why 830,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,400 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.