Hobbs Act — interstate commerce

Listen to this article

United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit

Criminal

Hobbs Act — interstate commerce

Where the defendant planned to rob a truck that he believed would be traveling in interstate commerce, the evidence is sufficient to support a conviction under the Hobbs Act.

“United States v. Watson, 525 F.3d 583 (7th Cir. 2008), does not require otherwise. That case also involved stolen money, and the defendant challenged his conviction on jurisdictional grounds. The government offered two theories in support of jurisdiction—the asset depletion theory described above and a separate theory that the money itself is an article that travelled in interstate commerce. Id. at 590. Watson rejected only the second: ‘if cash could serve as the jurisdictional hook, any robbery would be a federal crime under the Hobbs Act.’ Id. Nothing in Watson questioned the validity of the asset depletion theory for proving jurisdiction under the Hobbs Act. See id. More importantly, the Watson court’s chief concern was the failure of the jury to return a special verdict identifying the jurisdictional theory under which it convicted. Id. ‘When an indictment offers two theories of liability and a jury returns a general verdict that does not say under which theory it convicted, . . . we cannot . . . credit the jury if one of the theories is legally insufficient[.]’ Id. (emphasis in original). Of course, Muratovic pled guilty. Thus, Watson’s conclusions regarding the legal sufficiency of the government’s second theory in that case have no bearing here, where the asset depletion theory quite properly establishes jurisdiction.”

Affirmed.

11-3889 U.S. v. Muratovic

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Zagel, J., Flaum, J.