Task: Wrong Candidate Generation
Input (English): have travelled in interstate commerce to commit the murder, thereby making Mandaeina the cause of McGuire’s interstate travel. Second, the evidence listed above also provided a sufficient basis for the jury to conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that McGuire travelled in interstate commerce with the intent to murder Strada. In view of the evidence, the jury could fairly conclude that McGuire’s intent to commit the murder was formed in January 1990, continued up until the time that he committed the murder on May 16, 1990 and existed at the time that he travelled from Rockford, Illinois to Kansas City, Missouri, on some date betweeh May 12,1990, and May 16,1990. See United States v. Ellison, 793 F.2d 942, 950-51 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 937, 107 S.Ct. 415, 93 L.Ed.2d 366 (1986) (<HOLDING>). Finally, Earlywine’s testimony that he was 
 Holding statements: (A) holding that the government must show only that a defendant had knowledge of the reporting requirements and acted to avoid them (B) recognizing that the government need only prove that crime occurred reasonably near the date stated in the indictment (C) holding after lopez that the interstate nexus element of the hobbs act still requires the government to show only a minimal connection to interstate commerce (D) holding that while the government was required to prove that the defendants phone call crossed a state line  the government did not need to prove that the defendant knew of the interstate nexus (E) holding that under a similar statute the government need only show that the defendant had the intent to carry on illegal activity and that the crime occurred in conjunction with interstate travel
Output (English): holding that while the government was required to prove that the defendants phone call crossed a state line  the government did not need to prove that the defendant knew of the interstate nexus