a conspiracy charge of hobbs act violation where the government agents created a nonexistent individual or two that existant drugs in this case cocaine in order to get several individuals to participate in a conspiracy to violate the law the united states attorney hasn't given any real limiting principle on we are you can draw the line and i hobbs act violation charge that limits in some way the  opportunity or was it reasonable bringing in federal court really like this well factually it shouldn't be this really is a case that if it were to be filed ought to be filed in the state i think the supreme court made it is interstate that in any of that a crime of violence in the states i think the ones that should be regulating that kind of you know i think that it will probably does make a difference doesn't make any difference whether i was with you or not but i was following your argument pretty closely until i read judge posner decision tomorrow and then overlaid on to that the ordinary conspiracy law doctrine that says going to difference whether these were three victims or not was posner right or wrong i believe it's wrong trafficker on a one time deal they could do it so can commerce be on a one time deal they can be but it's not really a business if it's a one time the question is what is the word business an out and therefore a thanks to foreign commerce a government witness would testify that all cocaine in the united states is imported from outside the country that's not struck stricken  think and therefore affects foreign commerce the next portion of that is taken out yeah but that's that's just a very for imported from outside the country so we know that the cocaine involved in this case is imported from outside the country that  although there's really nothing that allows someone to make that draw the conclusion coca could have been grown in some mountains in california for all you know that was a stipulation that was contained in the think the marijuana obviously there are cases in i think in the circuit that say marijuana would not have been covered and would not have been for happened just like as in the last case this isn't marijuana cocaine i understand that your are a question i  requirement it's got to be a conspiracy to commit a crime and effect the state commerce we have any cases where in existence commerce was affected i think i'm aware of any cases that were briefs talked about situations where individuals were running drug traffickers by traveling from one state to another in order to complete that act here we have something where there's really nothing that we know there really was no interstate commerce we know there were no individuals we know there were no drugs we know there was no business and we know there was nothing other than a thought and agents mind and this is what they would do  manufacture any crime basically allow any agents to create any crime to manufacture a federal case out of whole cloth and air in order to prosecute in the federal system cases which be conceivably prosecuted in the state of california well you know yours is a general principle you could create a scenario exactly like this with terrorists the f b i has had to perform to trafford terrace and catches a whole bunch of people before the law of the capitol and your argument be well there's nothing there because there wasn't anything there that's the whole point of these laws about conspiracies and other things and you know if you're if because the what that does is it's not just some idle picnic on the part of the f b i but it stops terrorists from really blowing up something and here what the law enforcement did was stop a bunch of thugs from maybe killing somebody else well i hear what happened is in the parliament working with an agency to found an individual who then went out and recruited individuals including my client to participate in this bogus that well no creatures had only no preexisting criminal predisposition or intent or anything like that then you have a case of entrapment we don't want the government doing that but if somebody was sitting around predisposed to do this and it's perfectly ok for the government to stop it right now rather than allowing this to continue for all time killing people right and left who may not be government agents who may really be involved in the business usually there has to be some sort of  from continuing to do this kind of stuff like i had previous convictions but not for anything involving rugs and not involving anything involving violent acts like robbery again if he was entrapped that's why he's off the hook to congress to begin with that's right and in fact you even look at this and say there's no fact in the hammer stream even with the robbery of drugs because you clearly those were just continue on that happens day and day out and that there's this people are stealing rights and they continue on the camera streams that has no effect on commerce either what's your point on the choice the by the government to use the word interfere with commerce and choose one of the words and not in the statu stream court opinion on that so that was that was used and so but it's not in quoting the actual language in the statute but doesn't strong really answer your issue there and if the supreme court can use from the usual case would you like to save time to respond yes i would  be some sort of demand in this actual impact on commerce where there's a conspiracy involved however because the crime is the agreement rather than the completion of the offense there only need be a potential impact you can ask about various cases where this had been the who were mistakenly believed to be drug dealers or who were in fact government agents posing as drug dealers and even though those individuals were not engaged in the trafficking of drugs the money that was taken from them or tried to be taken from them was nevertheless deemed to have the potential  it was printed in washington put in circulation i sense of we that would be a broad category but the government not relying on that and in fact the seventh circuit recently i think rejected that particular argument that the fact that money transfers and were not were not pressing that argument  this appeal and in fact the in the fabian case in the second circuit the defendant in that case was trying to rob him and he believed had moved money drug money from one state to another there in fact was no money at all to be taken and nevertheless the court upheld the area the undercover agent talks about how we've been doing this for four years now that something is regular and as usual which indicates an ongoing activity in the reply brief the defendant argues that the fact that the that the drugs may have come into the state heart here for a few moments before they came into the hands of these drug dealers matters i just wanted to call the courts tensions to rise the decision in the togliatti which new site which talks about the fact of the fact that an interstate or foreign journey and just not mean that foreign commerce or through the point that came up today about whether there's a limit in principle to the government's ability to invent crimes or create the opportunity for crime for defendants to commit and there it is and that is in fact the boundaries of the commerce clause itself the last phrase talks about all commerce of which the of judicial notice i believe in the circumstances of this case ye have you read the mccoy case yes i have your honor have you got our machine gun case yes i have right yes the ninth circuit seems to be thinking a broad axe to the far end of the commerce clause that would probably stay seems to be at the far end of the commerce clause i would argue that homey machine guns the use of marijuana that's home grown for personal medicinal uses they're not talking about commercial transactions where in this case these people are not products traffickers and in fact the defendants were intending to take that cocaine and sell it themselves these were items that were in commerce and intended to continue to be in commerce and commercial transactions so while the government is still in the process of addressing these other latest developments of the ninth circuit as of the  yes it can affect commerce or has to affect an article or commodity in commerce but doesn't have to be either commerce real commerce or an article or commodity a real article o articles or real or imagined commodities when would say what are they doing in washington i think though that this particular language has been interpreted by other courts both in the cases i cited initially talking about bullies where the defendant has  particularly in the hobbs act basis so that if in fact the court's reading of this were correct that precedent would seem to be on a collision course with the courts reading and the government urged that the fact that because the crime is here is i they crossed those in need in the zero organized crime task force or something they maybe you're right i'm not exactly sure how this particular operation was undertaken thank you what the a t f wanted to do was to get people to bring some guns to the site in order to get their jurisdiction that's the answer to question who i was just asking with respect to  conspiracy issue and the possibility i would like to follow up on one of the questions the court brought out and that is there has to be some reality underlined for example in the context of an individual who was already dead and there was conspiracy to murder that person at least that person existed their life no longer existed but there was something there that was real here we have absolutely nothing we know and i think the circus has been basing and i don't have too much time here is that in the plea agreement there is really no discussion of business and yet in its opposition to the motion or rest of judgement the prosecution kept arguing narcotics dealers drug dealers dealer dealers dealers traffickers traffickers it's not a business then i say in the words business when they start talking about it though in the weeds it suddenly becomes a business and it morphs into something