Not what you're
looking for? Try an advanced search.
Buy This Entire Record For
United States v. Snyman
United States District Court, D. South Dakota, Western Division
January 17, 2018
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff,
ANDRIES SNYMAN Defendant.
JEFFREY L. VIKEN CHIEF JUDGE.
convicted defendant Andries Snyman of attempted enticement of
a minor using the internet. (Docket 96). Defendant timely
filed a motion for a judgment of acquittal pursuant to Rule
29(c) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. (Docket
101). The government opposes the motion. (Docket 103).
jury returned an indictment charging defendant with one count
of attempted enticement of a minor using the internet, a
violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2422(b). (Docket 15). The case
culminated in a four-day jury trial. At the close of the
government's case-in-chief, in a hearing outside the
jury's presence, defendant orally moved for a judgment of
acquittal under Rule 29(a) of the Federal Rules of Criminal
Procedure. The court made an oral record and denied his
motion. Defendant renewed his motion for a judgment of
acquittal at the close of all the evidence for primarily the
same reasons he asserted at the close of the government's
case-in-chief. The court denied his motion on the same
rationale provided in its earlier ruling.
indictment naming defendant alleged the following:
On or about the 5th day of August, 2016, in the District of
South Dakota, the defendant, Andries Snyman, did use a
facility and means of interstate commerce, that is, a
cellular phone and computer attached to the Internet, to
attempt to knowingly persuade, induce, entice, and coerce an
individual who had not yet attained 18 years of age to engage
in sexual activity for which the defendant could be charged
with a criminal offense, namely, rape in the fourth degree,
in violation of South Dakota Codified Law § 22-22-1(5),
all in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2422(b).
(Docket 15 at p. 1).
Number 4 in the court's jury instructions provided the
elements of attempted enticement of a minor using the
One, on or about August 5, 2016, in the District of
South Dakota, Mr. Snyman used a cell phone or computer
attached to the internet to attempt to knowingly persuade,
induce, entice or coerce an individual under the age of 18 to
engage in sexual activity;
The internet is an instrumentality and channel of interstate
Mr. Snyman is charged with the offense of attempted
enticement of a minor using the internet. It is not necessary
for the government to prove that the individual was actually
persuaded, induced, enticed or coerced to engage in sexual
activity. But it is necessary for the government to prove
that Mr. Snyman intended to engage in sexual activity with
the individual and knowingly and willfully took some action
that was a substantial step toward bringing about or engaging
in sexual activity.
A “substantial step” must be something more than
mere preparation, yet may be less than the last act necessary
before the actual commission of the substantive offense. In
order for behavior to be punishable as an attempt it need not
be incompatible with innocence, but the conduct must be
necessary to the consummation of the offense and be of such a
nature that a reasonable observer viewing the conduct in
context could conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that it was
undertaken with a design to commit the offense charged.
Mr. Snyman believed the individual was less than 18 years of
It is not necessary for the government to prove Mr. Snyman
communicated with an actual individual who was less than 18
years of age, but it is necessary for the government to prove
Mr. Snyman ...
Buy This Entire Record For