Case # 14CF1730
Date: March 4, 2015
PAROLEE SENTENCED TO 10 YEARS IN PRISON FOR TRAFFICKING AND PIMPING AN UNDERAGE GIRL AND PIMPING ANOTHER FEMALE TEENAGER
SANTA ANA – A parolee was convicted and sentenced today to 10 years in state prison and mandatory lifetime sex offender registration for trafficking and pimping an underage girl and pimping another female teenager. Dominique Legrand Lewis, 22, San Diego, pleaded guilty today to one felony count each of human trafficking of a minor, pimping a minor, pimping an adult, and a sentencing enhancement for a prior prison strike conviction for residential burglary in 2012.
Circumstances of the Case
Lewis is a pimp who exploits women and/or children for financial gain. The defendant in this case trafficked 17-year-old Jane Doe 1 by bringing her to Orange County to commit acts of prostitution. He pimped Jane Doe 1 and 18-year-old Jane Doe 2 by deriving support from the victims through the earnings and proceeds of prostitution and unlawfully procured the victims for the purpose of prostitution.
Between May 7, 2014, and May 21, 2014, Lewis drove both Jane Doe 1 and Jane Doe 2 from San Diego to an area of Santa Ana known for prostitution with the intent of having the victims engage in commercial sex.
On May 21, 2014, after contacting a Santa Ana Police Department (SAPD) officer posing as a sex purchaser, Jane Doe 1 was taken off the streets to a shelter where she could receive help.
On May 22, 2014, Lewis drove to the shelter with Jane Doe 2 and attempted to remove Jane Doe 1 from the shelter. The staff working at the shelter immediately contacted SAPD, who arrived at the scene and arrested Lewis.
Members of the Orange County Human Trafficking Task Force (OCHTTF) and the Orange County District Attorney’s Office (OCDA) work proactively to protect women and minors from falling victim to commercial sexual exploitation. This case was investigated by SAPD and OCHTTF, a partnership between the Anaheim Police Department, California Highway Patrol, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Huntington Beach Police Department, OCDA, Orange County Sheriff’s Department, and community and non-profit partners.
Deputy District Attorney Brad Schoenleben of the HEAT Unit prosecuted this case.
Proposition 35 and HEAT
In November 2012, California’s anti-human trafficking Prop 35 was enacted in California with 81 percent of the vote, and over 82 percent of the vote in Orange County, to increase the penalty for human trafficking, particularly in cases involving the trafficking of a minor by force.
A component of the OCHTTF is the OCDA’s Human Exploitation And Trafficking (HEAT) Unit, which targets perpetrators who sexually exploit and traffic women and underage girls for financial gain, including pimps, panderers, and human traffickers. The HEAT Unit uses a tactical plan called PERP: Prosecution, to bring justice for victims of human trafficking and hold perpetrators responsible using Prop 35; Education, to provide law enforcement training to properly handle human trafficking and pandering cases; Resources from public-private partnerships to raise public awareness about human trafficking and provide assistance to the victims; and Publicity, to inform the public and send a message to human traffickers that this crime cannot be perpetrated without suffering severe consequences.
Under the law, human trafficking is described as depriving or violating the personal liberty of another person with the intent to effect a violation of pimping or pandering. Pimping is described as knowingly deriving financial support in whole or in part from the proceeds of prostitution. Pandering is the act of persuading or procuring an individual to become a prostitute, or procuring and/or arranging for a person work in a house of prostitution.
Penal Code Section 236.1 defines:
(1) “Coercion” includes any scheme, plan, or pattern intended to cause a person to believe that failure to perform an act would result in serious harm to or physical restraint against any person; the abuse or threatened abuse of the legal process; debt bondage; or providing and facilitating the possession of any controlled substance to a person with the intent to impair the person’s judgment.
(2) “Commercial sex act” means sexual conduct on account of which anything of value is given or received by any person.
(3) “Deprivation or violation of the personal liberty of another” includes substantial and sustained restriction of another’s liberty accomplished through force, fear, fraud, deceit, coercion, violence, duress, menace, or threat of unlawful injury to the victim or to another person, under circumstances where the person receiving or apprehending the threat reasonably believes that it is likely that the person making the threat would carry it out.
(4) “Duress” includes a direct or implied threat of force, violence, danger, hardship, or retribution sufficient to cause a reasonable person to acquiesce in or perform an act which he or she would otherwise not have submitted to or performed; a direct or implied threat to destroy, conceal, remove, confiscate, or possess any actual or purported passport or immigration document of the victim; or knowingly destroying, concealing, removing, confiscating, or possessing any actual or purported passport or immigration document of the victim.
(5) “Forced labor or services” means labor or services that are performed or provided by a person and are obtained or maintained through force, fraud, duress, or coercion, or equivalent conduct that would reasonably overbear the will of the person.
(6) “Great bodily injury” means a significant or substantial physical injury.
(7) “Minor” means a person less than 18 years of age.
(8) “Serious harm” includes any harm, whether physical or nonphysical, including psychological, financial, or reputational harm, that is sufficiently serious, under all the surrounding circumstances, to compel a reasonable person of the same background and in the same circumstances to perform or to continue performing labor, services, or commercial sexual acts in order to avoid incurring that harm.
(i) The total circumstances, including the age of the victim, the relationship between the victim and the trafficker or agents of the trafficker, and any handicap or disability of the victim, shall be factors to consider in determining the presence of “deprivation or violation of the personal liberty of another,” “duress,” and “coercion” as described in this section.