USA v. James Franklin Liner

[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
____________________________
No. 11-14963
Non-Argument Calendar
____________________________
D. C. Docket No. 2:11-cr-00116-VEH-JEO-1
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
JAMES FRANKLIN LINER,
a.k.a. Jim,
Defendant-Appellant.
____________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
For the Northern District of Alabama
____________________________
(February 6, 2013)
Before MARCUS, EDMONDSON, and BLACK, Circuit Judges.
Case: 11-14963 Date Filed: 02/06/2013 Page: 1 of 2

-- 1 of 2 --

2
PER CURIAM:
James Liner appeals his conviction and sentence for attempting to induce an
individual who had not obtained the age of 18 years to engage in unlawful sexual
activity. Briefly stated, Liner argues that (1) the evidence was insufficient to
support his conviction, (2) the district court erred in failing to impose a sanction for
an alleged discovery violation by the government, and (3) the imposition of a ten-
year mandatory minimum sentence of imprisonment violates the Eighth
Amendment.
Sufficient evidence allowed the jury reasonably to infer that Liner used a
facility -- phone and internet -- of interstate commerce and took a substantial step
(including meeting with an intermediary and paying $100) toward the commission
of the offense: no sex act was required. There was no discovery violation by the
government: the pertinent information was not a criminal record and was not
intended to be used by the government at trial; the district court did not abuse its
discretion on sanctions. The ten-year mandatory minimum sentence did not violate
the Eighth Amendment: sexual abuse of children is a serious societal problem. For
background, see United States v. Farley, 607 F.3d 1294, 1343-45 (11th Cir. 2010).
AFFIRMED.
Case: 11-14963 Date Filed: 02/06/2013 Page: 2 of 2

-- 2 of 2 --