USA v. Pellett

U n i t e d 	S t a t e s 	D i s t r i c t 	C o u r t
N O R T H E R N D I S T R I C T O F T E X A S
D A L L A S D I V I S I O N
U N I T E D 	S T A T E S 	O F 	A M E R I C A 	§
§
v . 	§ 	C R I M I N A L 	A C T I O N 	N O . 	3 : 2 5 - C R - 0 5 6 8 - S
§
t v I I C H A E L 	P A T R I C K 	P E L L E T T 	§
M E M O R A N D U M 	O P I N I O N 	A N D 	O R D E R
This Memorandum Opinion and Order addresses Defendant Michael Patrick Pellett's
Motion to Dismiss Count 1 of the Indictment ("Motion") [ECF No. 19]. Having reviewed the
Motion, the Government's Response ("Response") [ECF No. 23], and the applicable law, the Court
D E N I E S t h e M o t i o n .
I . 	B A C K G R O U N D
In 2008, Defendant was convicted of Committing or Attempting a Lewd Act on a Minor
in South Carolina. Mot. 5-6; Resp. 1 . Then, in 2020, Defendant was convicted of Third-Degree
Sexual Exploitation of a Minor in South Carolina. Mot. 1 ; Resp. 2. In relation to his 2020
conviction, Defendant admitted to collecting "pornographic pictures of minors . . . for financial
gain." Resp. 3.
On December 17, 2025, Defendant was charged with Failure to Register as a Sex Offender
in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2250. See Indictment [ECF No. 1]. Defendant moves to dismiss the
Indictment, arguing that his prior conviction of Committing or Attempting a Lewd Act on a Minor
only has a 1 5-year registration requirement and his prior conviction of Third-Degree Sexual
Exploitation of a Minor does not have a registration requirement at all.
Case 3:25-cr-00568-S Document 26 Filed 10/13/26 Page 1 of 4 PageID <pageID>

I I . L E G A L S T A N D A R D
An individual violates 18 U.S.C. § 2250 if they (1) are required to register as a sex offender
under the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act ("SORNA"), (2) travel in interstate
commerce, and (3) knowingly fail to register or update a registration as required by SORNA.
United States v. Navarro, 54 F.4th 268, 273 (5th Cir. 2022). An individual has a duty to register
as a sex offender if they were convicted of a sex offense that is "a criminal offense that is a
specified offense against a minor." 34 U.S.C. § 2091 1(5)(A)(ii). A specified offense against a
minor includes, among other things, an offense that involves "[ajny conduct that by its nature is a
sex offense against a minor." 34 U.S.C. § 2091 1(7)(I).
I I I . A N A L Y S I S
Defendant only challenges the first element of 1 8 U.S.C. § 2250-the requirement to
register as a sex offender under SORNA. The Government concedes that Defendant was no longer
required to register as a sex offender for his prior 2008 conviction ofCommitting or Attempting a
Lewd Act on a Minor at the time of his arrest for the instant offense. See Resp. 1 . Thus, the Court
will only analyze whether Defendant' s prior conviction of Third-Degree Sexual Exploitation of a
Minor requires him to register as a sex offender under SORNA.
Defendant argues that Third-Degree Sexual Exploitation of a Minor is not a specified
offense against a minor because the elements do not involve any of the enumerated items under
34 U.S.C. § 2091 1(7), including "[a]ny conduct that by its nature is a sex offense against a minor."
Defendant argues that the Court should use a categorical approach and only consider the elements
ofthe predicate offense. Mot. 3-4. On the other hand, the Government argues for a non-categorical
approach, which allows the Court to consider the conduct underlying the offense. Resp. 3 . While
the Fifth Circuit has not clarified which method applies, the Court finds that Defendant's prior
Case 3:25-cr-00568-S Document 26 Filed 10/13/26 Page 2 of 4 PageID <pageID>

conviction of Third-Degree Sexual Exploitation of a Minor is a specified offense against a minor
under both approaches. See United States v. Schofield, 802 F.3d 722, 729(5th Cir. 2015) (declining
to decide which approach applies,' even though circuit precedent "tend[s] to favor the application
of the non-categorical approach," because the defendant's offense was a sex offense under both
approaches).
"Under a categorical approach to '[a]ny conduct that by its nature is a sex offense against
a minor,' [the Court] must determine whether [Defendant's] offense of conviction includes two
elements: (1) the victim is a minor and (2) the conduct is sexual in nature." Id. The elements of
Third-Degree Sexual Exploitation of a Minor include possession of "material that contains a visual
representation ofaminor . . . engaging in sexual activity." S.C. CoDEAiN. § 16-15-410(A) (2026);
see Hendricks v. Cohen, No. 3:08-2445 DCN, 2009 WL 2461246, at *4 (D.S.C. Aug. 1 1, 2009).
The elements involve a minor victim and conduct that is sexual in nature. Accordingly, Third-
Degree Sexual Exploitation ofa Minor involves "conduct that by its nature is a sex offense against
a minor," 34 U.S.C. § 2091 1(7)(I), and it is a specified offense against a minor under the
categorical approach.
Under the non-categorical approach, the Court considers the conduct underlying
Defendant's conviction of Third-Degree Sexual Exploitation of a Minor. Defendant admitted to
collecting "pornographic pictures ofminors." Resp. 3. Thus, his offense involves "conduct that by
its nature is a sex offense against a minor," 34 U.S.C. § 2091 1(7)(I); see Schofield, 802 F.3d at 729
(" [T]he key is conduct that contains a ' sexual component' toward a minor" (citation omitted)), and
it is a specified offense against a minor under the non-categorical approach. Because Third-Degree
Sexual Exploitation of a Minor is a specified offense against a minor under both approaches,
Defendant is required to register as a sex offender under SORNA.
3
Case 3:25-cr-00568-S Document 26 Filed 10/13/26 Page 3 of 4 PageID <pageID>

I V . 	C O N C L U S I O N
For the reasons stated above, the Court DENIES Defendant's Motion to Dismiss Count 1
of the Indictment [ECF No. 19].
S O O R D E R E D .
SIGNED October 13, 2026
K A R E N 	G R E N 	S C H O L E R
U N I T E D S T A T E S D I S T R I C T J U D G E
ru
Case 3:25-cr-00568-S Document 26 Filed 10/13/26 Page 4 of 4 PageID <pageID>