P. v. Harper CA2/5
Maurice Lateich Harper (defendant), an adult, gave a sexually-explicit letter to a 12-year-old girl, Leah B. (Leah). Among other things, the letter expressed defendant’s desire to “take [her] under [his] wing to lead [her] to success” and alluded to “a method that can make that ass huge in which most guys like.” Defendant referred to himself as “daddy” and promised that “[b]y the time [she is] 18, [Leah will] be making lots of money.” Defendant challenges his conviction for pandering by procuring a minor under age 16; his claim is that the letter did not expressly encourage Leah to engage in prostitution as opposed to modeling, dancing, or some other non-prostitution activity. We consider whether, under the deferential substantial evidence standard of review, any rational jury could find proven the charged pandering by procuring offense.
Comments on P. v. Harper CA2/5