NEW MEXICO TAXATION AND REVENUE DEPARTMENT
v.
RAMAH NAVAJO SCHOOL BOARD, INC., ET AL.; AND RAMAH NAVAJO SCHOOL BOARD, INC., ET AL. V. NEW MEXICO TAXATION AND REVENUE DEPARTMENT
NEW MEXICO TAXATION AND REVENUE DEPARTMENT
RAMAH NAVAJO SCHOOL BOARD, INC., ET AL.; AND RAMAH NAVAJO SCHOOL BOARD, INC., ET AL. V. NEW MEXICO TAXATION AND REVENUE DEPARTMENT
528 U.S. 928
Supreme Court of the United States (1999)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases
Opinion
Full opinion text not available for this case.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
United States v. Diaz, 248 F.3d 1065 (11th Cir. 2001)…mit robbery or extortion, that “in any way or degree obstructf ], delay[ ], or affect[ ] commerce or the movement of any article or commodity in commerce.” U.S. v. Kaplan, 171 F. 3d 1351, 1354 (11th Cir.) (quoting 18 U.S.C. § 1951(a)), cert. denied, 528 U.S. 928, 120 S.Ct. 323, 145 L.Ed.2d 252 (1999). To prove a Hobbs Act conspiracy under 18 U.S.C. §§ 1951(a) & (b)(1), the government must prove that: (1) two or more persons agreed to commit a robbery or extortion encompassed within the Hobbs Act; (2) the d…1 / 2
-
United States v. Nghia LE, 256 F.3d 1229 (11th Cir. 2001)…act on commerce does not need to be substantial; all that is required is minimal impact.” United States v. Kaplan, 171 F. 3d 1351, 1354 (11th Cir.) (quoting United States v. Castleberry, 116 F. 3d 1384, 1388 (11th Cir.1997)) (en banc), cert. denied, 528 U.S. 928, 120 S.Ct. 323, 145 L.Ed.2d 252 (1999). See also United States v. Diaz, 248 F. 3d 1065, 1084 (11th Cir.2001). Where a defendant is charged with attempt or conspiracy to violate the Hobbs Act, “the interstate nexus may be demonstrated by evidence…1 / 2