UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. TIMOTHY LEE BAKER - Articles

All Content

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. TIMOTHY LEE BAKER

Posted by: Azya Thornton on Sep 12, 2025

Court: 6th Circuit Court (Published Opinions)

Attorneys 1: ARGUED: Steven D. Jaeger, HEMMER WESSELS MCMURTRY PLLC, Ft. Mitchell, Kentucky, for Appellant.

Attorneys 2: ARGUED: John J. Schoettle, UNITED STATES ATTORNEY’S OFFICE, Grand Rapids, Michigan, for Appellee.

Attorneys 3: ON BRIEF: Steven D. Jaeger, HEMMER WESSELS MCMURTRY PLLC, Ft. Mitchell, Kentucky, for Appellant.

Attorneys 4: ON BRIEF: Austin J. Hakes, UNITED STATES ATTORNEY’S OFFICE, Grand Rapids, Michigan, for Appellee.

Judge(s): GRIFFIN, LARSEN, and MATHIS, Circuit Judges

Court Appealed: United States District Court for the Western District of Michigan at Grand Rapids

MATHIS, Circuit Judge. Timothy Baker dated Shaelyn Fann, but he also expressed sexual interest in Fann’s eleven-year-old daughter, S.H. At the time, Baker was a registered sex offender. Baker and Fann groomed S.H. for sexual activity, and Fann sent Baker several sexually explicit photographs of S.H. Law enforcement learned about Baker’s illegal activities involving S.H. while investigating him for sexually assaulting another minor. A jury convicted Baker of: (1) conspiracy to sexually exploit a minor, (2) coercion and enticement of a minor, and (3) committing the first two offenses while being required to register as a sex offender. Baker raises three challenges on appeal. First, Baker argues that the district court erred in finding that he had two prior convictions for sexually exploiting minors. The district court’s finding increased Baker’s minimum statutory sentence for conspiracy to sexually exploit a minor from 15 years to 35 years in prison. Second, Baker argues that the district court violated his double-jeopardy rights. Third, Baker argues that the district court erred by allowing two minors to testify that he had sexually assaulted them. Discerning no error, we affirm.

Attachments: