Chatwin v. United States

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• recognizing that Congress used “[c]omprehensive language . . . to cover every possible variety of kidnaping followed by interstate transportation”
• holding that an “act of holding a kidnaped person for a proscribed purpose necessarily implies an unlawful physical or mental restraint for an appreciable period”
• finding that the evidence failed to show that the defendants had confined the victim against her or her parents' wishes
• finding that the evidence failed to show that the defendants had confined the victim against her or her parents' wishes
• holding there was no kidnapping where facts did not prove that allegedly kidnapped minor was held against her will
• stating that the involuntariness of seizure and detention is the very essence of the crime of kidnapping

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).