United States v. Roger Lee Caldwell, Jr.

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
DecidedApril 14, 2026
Docket24-11903
StatusUnpublished

This text of United States v. Roger Lee Caldwell, Jr. (United States v. Roger Lee Caldwell, Jr.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
United States v. Roger Lee Caldwell, Jr., (11th Cir. 2026).

Opinion

USCA11 Case: 24-11903 Document: 45-1 Date Filed: 04/14/2026 Page: 1 of 8

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit ____________________ No. 24-11903 Non-Argument Calendar ____________________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus

ROGER LEE CALDWELL, JR., Defendant-Appellant. ____________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida D.C. Docket No. 8:22-cr-00334-KKM-AEP-1 ____________________

Before ABUDU, KIDD, and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Roger Caldwell, Jr., was convicted of production of child pornography, transportation of a minor with the intent to engage USCA11 Case: 24-11903 Document: 45-1 Date Filed: 04/14/2026 Page: 2 of 8

2 Opinion of the Court 24-11903

in sexual activity, and possession of child pornography. He now ap- peals and challenges the district court’s admission of certain out-of-court statements during his trial. We find that any error in admitting this testimony was harmless and affirm Caldwell’s con- victions. I. BACKGROUND In March 2022, law enforcement received a call alleging that Caldwell had been sexually abusing his ex-fiancée’s minor daugh- ters for several years. Police spoke with the victims and their mother and recovered nearly 150 images of child pornography from the household computer in a folder labeled “rogerspics.” Thereafter, Caldwell was charged with production of child pornography, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2251(a) and (e) (Count One), transportation of a minor with intent to engage in sexual ac- tivity, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2423(a) (Counts Two and Three), and possession of child pornography depicting a minor under the age of twelve, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2252(a)(4)(B) and (b)(2) (Count Four). Caldwell pleaded not guilty to these charges and proceeded to trial in February 2024. We will briefly summarize the trial evidence relevant to our analysis. Detective Alexander Nikias testified that he was the one to respond to the 911 call regarding possible child abuse. The mother of the victims informed him that Caldwell, her former fiancé of about six years, had been sexually abusing her two daughters. De- tective Nikias testified that he spoke to the victims, but as he was about to testify to these conversations, Caldwell objected to this USCA11 Case: 24-11903 Document: 45-1 Date Filed: 04/14/2026 Page: 3 of 8

24-11903 Opinion of the Court 3

testimony, in relevant part, as inadmissible hearsay. The court overruled the objection “to the extent [Detective Nikias was] going to explain [his] further investigation steps,” and Caldwell declined to have a limiting instruction read. Detective Nikias then recounted his three-to-four-minute conversation with the older of the two victims, stating that: AN recounted a series of allegations of sexual abuse stemming from when she was younger, starting off with that the defendant – that [Caldwell] forced her to suck his you know what was one of the first things she told me. She recounted several instances through several states over the years of ongoing sexual abuse, as well as neglect for forcing her to drink alcohol and smoke marijuana. When Detective Nikias began to discuss his conversation with the younger victim, AM, Caldwell reasserted his hearsay ob- jection, which was again overruled. Detective Nikias proceeded with his testimony and explained that, during his short conversa- tion with AM, she “recounted several instances of what appeared to be very suspicious behavior from [Caldwell], including choking her out with a blue towel and being alone with her sister when they were both naked.” Detective Nikias further testified that he had a second con- versation with the victims “[t]o get clarification of where the events had occurred and also [see] if there was any physical evidence that needed to be collected.” He indicated that, during these supple- USCA11 Case: 24-11903 Document: 45-1 Date Filed: 04/14/2026 Page: 4 of 8

4 Opinion of the Court 24-11903

mental conversations, AM “recounted instances of her and her sis- ter being naked in the room alone with [Caldwell], him removing the bed sheets beforehand, and forcing her to wear her mother’s lingerie,” and AN provided him with a pair of underwear that she had been wearing during “the last sexual incident” with Caldwell approximately two days prior. Later laboratory testing showed the presence of semen and determined that it was highly probable that both AN and Caldwell’s DNA were present in the underwear. AN, who was fifteen years old at the time of trial, testified that, around the time she turned eight, her family moved with Caldwell from Florida to West Virginia. She explained that the abuse began shortly after the move when Caldwell forced her to perform oral sex on him on a day she came home sick from school. Caldwell continued this behavior “[a]bout once or twice a week, sometimes three times” while they lived in West Virginia. Caldwell would also threaten to harm AN, her mother, and her younger sis- ter AM. Within a year, the family moved to Illinois, and the abuse escalated, as Caldwell attempted to rape AN and would hit her when she often “t[old] him no.” During this time, AN also found Caldwell messing around with” AM. AN further testified that, from the ages of 9 to 11, the family lived at multiple locations in Florida, and Caldwell continued sex- ually abusing her during that time. On one occasion where Cald- well forced her to perform oral sex, AN thought he might have taken a photo of her. This photograph was recovered from Cald- well’s cell phone and had been admitted into evidence prior to USCA11 Case: 24-11903 Document: 45-1 Date Filed: 04/14/2026 Page: 5 of 8

24-11903 Opinion of the Court 5

AN’s testimony. While Caldwell’s face was not visible in the image, one could see a distinctive belt that Caldwell “always wore.” The government also showed AM the photograph, and she identified the subjects of the image as Caldwell and herself at nine years old. In continuing her testimony, AN elaborated that the family moved to Ohio when she was eleven, where Caldwell’s physical and sexual abuse of both her and her sister continued. When the family decided to move back to Florida in 2022, AN and AM made a return trip to Ohio with Caldwell to finish packing. During that weeklong road trip, Caldwell sexually assaulted both girls multiple times, and he would occasionally show AN pornography and force her to drink alcohol. AN thereafter told her mother, who had bro- ken off her relationship with Caldwell, about the abuse, and she called the police. AN further recalled speaking to the police and giving them the pair of underwear she had worn during the trip from Ohio. AM, who was 14 at the time of trial, testified that the first instance of sexual abuse she remembered involved Caldwell forc- ing her to perform oral sex in exchange for a piece of chocolate. The next time, he “pinned [her] to the couch” and raped her, and this abuse continued “[a]ny day that [her] mother was at work.” She also remembered Caldwell at some point showing her pornog- raphy. AM further recalled verbal threats Caldwell made to her and a time where he choked her with a towel when she refused to take off her clothes. AM also discussed the trip to Ohio and stated that Caldwell raped her in each of the hotels in which they stayed. USCA11 Case: 24-11903 Document: 45-1 Date Filed: 04/14/2026 Page: 6 of 8

6 Opinion of the Court 24-11903

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

United States v. Guzman
167 F.3d 1350 (Eleventh Circuit, 1999)
United States v. Kapordelis
569 F.3d 1291 (Eleventh Circuit, 2009)
United States v. Michael Grzybowicz
747 F.3d 1296 (Eleventh Circuit, 2014)
United States v. Trevor Ransfer
749 F.3d 914 (Eleventh Circuit, 2014)
United States v. Robert William Barton
909 F.3d 1323 (Eleventh Circuit, 2018)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
United States v. Roger Lee Caldwell, Jr., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-roger-lee-caldwell-jr-ca11-2026.