Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

01-2950 U.S. v. O'Hara

By: dmc-admin//August 26, 2002//

01-2950 U.S. v. O'Hara

By: dmc-admin//August 26, 2002//

Listen to this article

“Where, as here, the constitutional challenge for vagueness involves no First Amendment issue, we evaluate it in light of the statute’s application to the facts of the case. Collins, 272 F.3d at 988. We believe that O’Hara had more than fair and reasonable warning that his conduct was violative of the Travel Act. The Act plainly prohibits crossing state lines to promote or engage in extortion. O’Hara did just that.

He traveled interstate between Milwaukee and Chicago for the sole purpose of threatening and assaulting El-Shafei in an attempt to extort the stolen goods that were in El-Shafei’s possession. Without question, the terms of the Act provide due notice that such conduct is illegal. Despite the Travel Act’s clear prohibition against the extortionist activity in which O’Hara engaged, O’Hara goes on to argue that the Act is nonetheless inapplicable to his conduct because it is limited to combating organized crime. While we have recognized that the kind of unlawful activity the Act seeks to curtail is often and/or characteristically pursued by organized crime, nothing in the Act or the decisions of this Court imposes such a blanket limitation. Indeed, we have approved use of the Travel Act to obtain a conviction outside the context of organized crime where the use of interstate travel related ‘significantly, rather than incidentally or minimally, to the illegal activity.’ United States v. McNeal, 77 F.3d 938, 944 (7th Cir. 1996) (citations omitted). So long as the evidence presented establishes such a relation and otherwise satisfies the elements of a section 1952 violation, as it did in this case, a conviction under the Travel Act may be obtained regardless of the defendant’s involvement or lack thereof in organized crime.”

Affirmed.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin, Adelman, J., Bauer, J.

Polls

Should Steven Avery be granted a new evidentiary hearing?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Legal News

See All Legal News

WLJ People

Sea all WLJ People

Opinion Digests