United States v. Mario Weicks

MEMORANDUM

Mario Weicks appeals the sentence imposed by the district court. We affirm. Because the parties are familiar with the history of this case, we need not recount it here.

I

The district court did not err by separating the four counts of sexual misconduct, arising from Appellant’s two trips to Las Vegas with the victim, into two groups for sentencing purposes. Counts can involve substantially the same harm when they “involve the sáme victim and two or more acts or transactions connected by a common criminal objective or constituting part of a common scheme or plan.” U.S.S.G. § 3D1.2(b). The commentary to § 3D1.2(b) states that multiple counts may form “a single course of conduct with a single criminal objective and represent essentially one composite harm to the same victim ... even if they constitute legally distinct offenses occurring at different times.” U.S.S.G. § 3D1.2 cmt. n. 4. In this case, the two trips did not necessarily have “a common criminal objective” or involve a single “composite harm” to the victim. U.S.S.G. § 3D1.2(b).

Although both trips resulted in sexual abuse of the same victim, the trips took place eight days apart and therefore may reasonably…