Legal Opinion · Dissent

United States v. Barry Kaplan

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit

Decided April 9, 1999No. 95-4908Published

1Dissent

BIRCH, Circuit Judge,

dissenting, in which TJOFLAT, ANDERSON and BARKETT, Circuit Judges, join:

I respectfully dissent. The majority’s holding will result in the federalization of any crime involving extortion to acquire money. Plainly stated, “[t]his is a case about federalism.”1 If we were to accept the government’s position on this issue, the Hobbs Act would completely subsume state extortion and robbery laws by creating a federal criminal offense in each and every case in which the pay-off is at all likely to cross state lines. Surely, Congress cannot have intended any such result.

The plain…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Coleman v. ThompsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
  2. United States v. LopezSupreme Court of the United States · 1995
  3. Russell v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
  4. United States v. GrimesCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1998
  5. United States v. John W. Quigley Johnny Ray JonesCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1995

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API