North Dakota v. Sheperd

by
Anjelo Sheperd appealed his conviction entered after a bench trial on stipulated facts, finding him guilty of patronizing a minor for commercial sexual activity. Law enforcement arrested Sheperd as a part of a multi-agency sting operation targeted at apprehending individuals paying, or attempting to pay, for sex with minors. Law enforcement posted an advertisement on Backpage.com. The advertisement impliedly sought sexual encounters with men, but did not reference involvement with a minor. Sheperd responded to the advertisement. A text message exchange between Sheperd and an undercover officer, purporting to be a female, discussed rates for sexual activities. Later in the text message exchange, the undercover officer told Sheperd "she" was almost seventeen. Sheperd arrived at the sting location, set up at a hotel in Fargo, and was arrested and charged. On appeal, Sheperd argued N.D.C.C. 12.1-41-06(1)(a) required the presence of a minor and because no actual minor was involved in this case, the State did not meet its burden of proof. Sheperd further argued the North Dakota Supreme Court should have decided North Dakota v. Davison, 900 N.W.2d 66, differently. The Supreme Court found that under the plain language of N.D.C.C. 12.1-41-06(1)(a), an individual could be convicted of an offense if the agreement was made with someone other than a minor. "This construction interprets the statute in a practical manner, giving consideration to the context of the statute and the purpose for which it was enacted. This construction also targets those who intentionally seek out children as their sexual objects, as provided in the comments to Section 7 of the Uniform Act on Prevention of and Remedies for Human Trafficking drafted by the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws." The Court was not persuaded that "Davidson" should have been decided differently. View "North Dakota v. Sheperd" on Justia Law