United States v. Gerry M. Davis

How courts have described this case

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

• finding de minimis standard satisfied by extortion of a bar that purchased alcohol that had traveled in interstate commerce
• finding de minimis standard satisfied by extortion of a bar that purchased alcohol that had traveled in interstate commerce
• finding de minimis standard satisfied by extortion of a bar that purchased alcohol that had traveled in interstate commerce
• considering and rejecting the argument that the Hobbs Act requires a substantial, as opposed to a de minimis, effects test where the robberies are directed against business entities
• interpreting Brown as holding that “[t]he de minimis standard was satisfied because the bar purchased some of its beer from an instate distributor, which, in turn, purchased all of its beer from out-of-state manufacturers”
• addressing commerce clause argument raised in Rule 29(c) motion without specifying the standard of review, but stating that it exercised plain error review over separate commerce clause argument that was not raised in Rule 29(c) motion

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).