
In 1999, Defendant Maude Paulin, along with and her then-husband Saintfor Palin and her mother Evelyn Theodore, arranged to smuggle a then-fourteen-year-old girl from Haiti to the United States. According to evidence presented at trial, from 1999 to 2005, defendants used physical abuse and threats to force the victim to work as a domestic servant. The victim worked, without compensation, for approximately 15 hours each day, performing various household tasks such as cooking, cleaning, and yard work. Defendants further controlled and isolated the victim by threatening to have her arrested or deported to Haiti if she reported defendants to law enforcement. In June 2005, the victim escaped from the defendants with the assistance of a family friend who had witnessed this treatment.
Defendants Maude Paulin and Evelyn Theodore were found guilty by a federal jury of conspiring to violate the victim’s civil rights and of forcing the victim to work for them. The jury also found Maude Paulin and Saintfort Paulin guilty of harboring an illegal alien. A fourth defendant, C.T., was acquitted of the conspiracy and forced labor charges. Due to an illness, Theodore’s sentencing date has not yet been determined.
The district court made a judgment on May 20, 2008, and the defendant filed a timely notice of appeal on May 28, 2008. The United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit affirmed the district court’s judgment on February 4, 2009.
Due to an illness, Theodore’s sentencing date has not yet been determined.
Maude Paulin appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit claiming that her conviction violated her Due Process rights and the principles underlying the Ex Post Facto Clause because the government relied on conduct that pre-dated the effective date of the statute and that, therefore, her conviction was possibly based exclusively on pre-October 28, 2000 conduct. This argument was contradicted by the evidence in record that detailed conduct that occurred “over three years after the effective date of the” statute.
United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida
http://www.law.umich.edu/clinical/HuTrafficCases/Pages/CaseDisp.aspx?caseID=113
http://www.justice.gov/crt/about/app/briefs/paulin_opinion.pdf
http://www.justice.gov/crt/about/app/briefs/paulin.pdf
http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/2008/May/08-crt-446.html