Legal Opinion

United States v. Hardeman

District Court, N.D. California

Decided January 23, 2009No. CR 08-0847 WHAPublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO DISMISS INDICTMENT

WILLIAM ALSUP, District Judge.

INTRODUCTION

In this federal prosecution for failure to register as a sex offender under the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act, defendant moves to dismiss the indictment on the grounds that the Act violates the Commerce Clause and that he was not in fact required to register as a sex offender under the Act. For the reasons stated below, defendant’s motion to dismiss the indictment is Denied.

STATEMENT

In November 2008, defendant Gary Hardeman was indicted on one count of failure to register as a sex offender…

2Cases cited23 opinions

  1. Apprendi v. New JerseySupreme Court of the United States · 2000
  2. United States v. LopezSupreme Court of the United States · 1995
  3. Jones v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2000
  4. Scarborough v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
  5. Jones v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2000

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. United States v. HernandezDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 2009
  2. United States v. BarnerDistrict Court, N.D. New York · 2009
  3. Kasckarow v. Board of Examiners of Sex OffendersNew York Supreme Court · 2011

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

Powered by the Exa API