JOSHUA ISAIAH JONES v. STATE OF MARYLAND
Court of Special Appeals of Maryland, Shaw Geter, January 4, 2019,
Human Trafficking – The crime of Human trafficking does not merge with the crime of receiving proceeds from prostitution for sentencing purposes
Facts:
A PG-county vice detective made an arrest of a 17-year-old prostitute, R.D., after arranging a meeting at a hotel room on Backpage. After arresting the prostitute, police noted that Jones had reserved the hotel room and arrested him when he arrived back at the hotel.
R.D. told police that Jones and others forced her to prostitute herself and give them the proceeds, saying that she “owed” them.
Jones was charged, convicted, and sentenced to twenty-five years’ imprisonment, with all but seven years suspended for one count of human trafficking; a consecutive ten-year suspended sentence for receiving the earnings of a prostitute; and five years supervised probation.
Jones appealed, arguing that he shouldn’t have been sentenced for both human trafficking and receiving the earnings of a prostitute, since they can consist of the same act. Jones also appealed on jury-instruction and insufficient evidence issues.
Held: The Court of Special Appeals held that human trafficking and receiving the earnings of a prostitute can be sentenced separately.
Human Trafficking – Human trafficking – Human Trafficking includes 11 crimes related to placing another in prostitution or forcing marriage or sexual performance. The crime is elevated to a felony if the victim is a minor or force/threat/fraud is used to compel the victim.
Human Trafficking – Human trafficking includes the crime of receiving money or something of value in exchange for human trafficking.
From the Case: The evidence at trial reflects that Jones, operating under an alias, encouraged R.D. to take a train from North Carolina to Washington, D.C. When she arrived, she learned she was expected to engage in prostitution and was placed in debt bondage. In our view, Jones’ actions in recruiting R.D. to travel to Maryland for this purpose, standing alone, was sufficient proof of human trafficking.
From the Case: Once R.D. was in Jones’ charge, however, he also gave her money and then told her that she could not return to North Carolina until the debt was repaid. He subsequently transported R.D. to outcalls and placed her in a hotel where she met men for purposes of prostitution. These actions were also clear violations of the human trafficking statute.
Receiving the Earnings of a Prostitute – This crime is committed when someone receives money/proceeds of prostitution with the intent to profit from the prostitution, promote prostitution/human-trafficking, or conceal the source of the money.
From the Case: Jones’ human trafficking convictions were predicated on actions unrelated to his taking $200 from R.D., which she had “earned” working as a prostitute.
Sentence Merger – Sentences merge when they would amount to multiple punishments for the same offense
Sentence Merger – Sentences may be merged if:
– both charges rely on the same evidence
– it is ambiguous whether the legislature intended to punish the conduct twice (“rule of lenity”)
– the interests of fundamental fairness require that they be merged
Prostitution and Related Crimes – Someone charged with Human Trafficking, Receiving the Earnings of a Prostitute, Enticing an Individual under 16, and House of Prostitution may “may also be prosecuted and sentenced for violating any other applicable law”
Receiving the Earnings of a Prostitute – Receiving the Earnings of a Prostitute includes an intent to violate another Prostitution-related crime, which includes human trafficking. Therefore, they are not the same crime and the legislature did not intend that they merge for sentencing.
Jury Question – Judges may answer questions from the jury so long as those responses are accurate and do not mislead the jury; they can do more than refer the jury back to the instruction already provided.