2010 D e c i sion s O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit 1-27-2010 

# U SA v . Thom a s Reyes P r e c e de nt i al or N on-P r e c e de nt i al : N on-P r e c e de nt i al D ocke t N o . 08-4783

F o llow thi s and a dd it ion al work s at : http://d i git alc ommon s .l a w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2010

Thi s de c i sion i s br ou ght t o you for f r e e and ope n a c c e s s b y the O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit at V i ll anova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. It h as be e n a c c ept e d for inclusion in 2010 D e c i sion s b y an author i z e d a dmini s tr at or of V i ll anova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. F or mor e inform at ion, p le as e c ont a ct Be n j amin . C arl s on@l a

w . vi ll anova . e du . Re c omme nde d C it at ion " U SA v . Thom as Reye s " (2010). 2010 D e cisio n s . P ape r 2005. http://d i git alc ommon s .l a

w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2010/2005T he H onor abl e J ohn E . J ones , I I I , U ni t ed St at es D i s t r i ctJ udge forthe M i ddl e D i s tr i ct * of Penns y l vani a, s i t t i ng bydes i gnat i on. NOT P RE CE DE NT I AL UN I TED STATES CO UR T OF A PP EALS F O R T H E T H IR D C IR C U IT N o. 08- 4783 UNI TE D ST ATE S OF AM ERI CA

v. TH O M A S RE Y ES,

A ppel l ant A p p ea l from the U n it ed S tat es D istri ct C o u rt f o r th e E a ste rn D istric t o f P e n n sy lv a n ia ( D . C . C r i m i nal A ct i on N o. 2- 06- cr - 00654- 1) D i s t r i ctJ udge: H onor abl e J ohn R . Padova Subm i t t ed U nderT hi r d C i r cui tL A R 34. 1( a)

J anuary12, 2010 B efor e: A M B R O , C H A G A R E S and J O N E S, C i r cui tJ udges * ( O pi ni on fi l ed: J anuary27, 2010)

OP I NI ON A M B R O , C i r cui tJ udge In J u ly 2 0 0 6 , T h o m a s R e y e s a tte m p te d to ro b a g ro c e ry st o re in P h ila d e lp h ia . A2

j ur yconvi ct ed hi m of var i ous cr i m es r el at i ng t o t hi s i nci dent . R ey es appea l s , chal l engi ng o n lyh is c o n v ictio n f

o r a ttem p ted in ter f

e re n c e w ith in ter sta te c o m m e rc e b yro b b e ry , in v io latio n o f

1 8 U .S .C . § 1 9 5 1 (a ) (th e “ H o b b s A c t”) . In p a rticu lar , h e c h a llen g e s h is c o n v ictio n o n th re e g ro u n d s: 1 ) th e in su f f icie n c yo f

th e G o v e rn m e n t’s e v id e n c e to su sta in h is H o b b s A c t co n v ictio n ; 2 ) th e u n c o n stitu tio n a lityo f th e H o b b s A c t as a p p lied to h is conduct ; and 3) defi ci enci es i n t he i ndi ctm entand j urychar ge. W e r e j e c te a c h o f

t h e s e c h a l l e n g e s , a n d th e r e f o r e a f f i r m. I. T he G om ez G r oceryi s l ocat ed i n t he G erm ant ow n s ect i on of Phi l adel phi a. T he s t or e i s open t o out - of- s t at e cus t om er s , and much of i t s i nvent oryi s del i ver ed fr om other s t a t e s ( i n c l u d i n g New J e r s e y , Nor t h Ca r o l i n a , a n d Vi r g i n i a ) . Th e s t o r e a l s o h a s a n ATM m a c h in e o n p re m is e s . O n J u ly 1 6 , 2 0 0 6 , R e y e s a tte m p te d to ro b th e s to re w ith a lo a d e d , 9 m m . s e m ia u to m a tic p is to l. A ro u n d n o o n , R e y e s e n ter e d th e sto re . H e w a s w e a rin g g lo v e s a n d g las se s, a s w e ll as a banda na thatcover ed hi s fac e. R ey es l ocked the fr ontdoor , dr ew hi s pi s t ol , and a n n o u n c e d th a t itw a s a “ stic k u p .” F ro m th e re , h e o rd e re d c u sto m e rs a n d e m p lo y e e s to d rop to the flo o r. W h en R ey es lea p t on the c o u n ter t o rea ch the re g ist er, th e sto re m anage rand an e m pl oy ee a t t empt ed t o s t op hi m . R ey es fi r ed hi s gun s ever al t i m es dur i ng t he s t ruggl e. H e w as ul t i m at el ys ubdued and a r r es t ed. D ur i ng t he i nci dent , var i ous i t ems w er e knocke d fr om the s hel ves . I n t he end, t heT he D i s t r i ctC our thad j ur i s di ct i on under18 U . S. C . § 3231. W e have j ur i s di ct i on 1 under28 U . S. C . § 1291. 3 groceryst ore cl osed f

or the rem ai nd er of the w orkday

— app roxi m at el yei gh tho urs.

II. In N ov em ber 200 6, a grand j uryreturned a three- cou nt i nd i ct m ent agai nstR ey es, char gi ng hi m w i t h one counteac h of: 1) H obbs A ctr obbery ; 2) carr y i ng and us i ng a f ir e a rm d u ri n g a n d in re la tio n to a c ri m e o f v io le n c e (i n v io la tio n o f 1 8 U .S .C . § 9 2 4 ( c ) ( 1 ) ) ; a n d 3 ) p o s s e s s i o n o f a f i r e a r m b ya c o n v i c t e d f

e l o n ( i n v i o l a t i o n o f

1 8 U. S . C. § 922( g) ( 1) ) . R ey es ’ s j ur yt r i al began i n A ugus t2007. A ttr i al , he di d notobj ectt o t he in d ic tm e n t, th e tr ia l c o u rt ’s ju ry in s tru c tio n s , o r t h e c o n s titu tio n a lity o f th e H o b b s A c t. F oll ow i ng a t hree- dayt ri al , R ey es w as conv i ct ed o n all cou nts . T he D i s t r i ctC our ts ent ence d R ey es t o 180 m ont hs ’ i m pr i s onm ent , fi ve y ear s of su p e rv ise d re lea se , a $ 1 ,0 0 0 f in e , an d a sp e c ial a ss e ss m e n t o f $ 3 0 0 . R e y e s tim e ly appea l ed. 1 III . I n t hi s appea l , R ey es chal l enges onl yhi s H obbs A ctr obberyconvi ct i on. I n t he end, w e r ej ecteac h of R ey es ’ s ar gum ent s s eeki ng t o over turn t hatconvi ct i on. A. Fi r s t , R ey es chal l enges t he s uffi ci encyof the G overnm ent ’ s evi dence t o convi ct hi m of H obbs A ctr obbery . “I n r evi ew i ng a cha l l enge t o t he s uffi ci encyof the evi dence ,4

w e ‘m u st d e ter m in e w h e th e r, v iew in g th e e v id e n c e m o st f a v o ra b lyto th e [ G ]o v e rn m e n t, t her e i s s ubs t ant i al evi dence t o s uppor tthe j ury ’ s gui l t yver di ct . ’ ” U ni t ed Stat es v. U

r ban , 4 0 4 F . 3 d 7 5 4 , 7 6 2 (3d C ir . 2 0 0 5 ) ( q u o t i n gUn i t e d S ta t e s v . I

d o wu , 157 F. 3d 265, 268 ( 3d C i r . 1998) ) . “W e ‘ w i l l s us t ai n t he ver di cti f anyr at i onal tr i erof fa ctcoul d have f ound t he es s ent i al el ement s of the cr i m e bey ond a r eas onabl e doubt . T hus , a cl ai m of i ns uffi ci ency of the evi dence pl ace s a veryheavybur den on an a ppel l ant . ’ ” Id . at762- 63 ( quot i ng U ni t ed Stat es v. D ent , 149 F. 3d 180, 187 ( 3d C i r . 1998) ) ( i nt ernal quot at i on m arks o m itted). T he H obbs A ctappl i es t o anyr obberyat t empt that“i n anyw ayordegr ee o b stru c ts, d e lays, o r a f

f e c ts c o m m e rc e o r th e m o v e m e n t o f a n ya rticle o r c o m m o d ityin c o m m e rc e .” 1 8 U .S .C . § 1 9 5 1 (a ). “T o su sta in a c o n v ictio n f o r in ter f e re n c e w ith comm er ce byr obberyunder§ 1951, the [G ] overnm entm us tpr ove the el ementof i nt er fer ence w i th i nt er s t at e orfor ei gn comm er ce byr obbery . ” U ni t ed Stat es v. H

ayw ood , 3 6 3 F .3 d 2 0 0 , 2 0 9 (3 d C ir . 2 0 0 4 ). R e y e s a rg u e s th a t H o b b s A c t ro b b e ryre q u ire s a sp e c if ic in ten t to a f

f e c t in ter sta te comm er ce, and thatt he G overnm entfai l ed t o pr ove s uch a s peci fi c i nt entbey ond a r eas onabl e doubt . W e di s agr ee. I ti s w el l - es t abl i s hed thata s peci fi c i nt entt o aff ect i nt er s t at e comm er ce i s notan el ementof H obbs A ctr obbery . I ndeed, “[i ] ti s not nece s s aryt hatt he pu rpose [of the conduc tw as ] t o aff ecti nt er s t at e comm er ce. ” U ni t ed S ta tes v . A dd o n izio , 451 F. 2d 49, 77 ( 3d C i r . 1972) ( emphasi s i n or i gi nal ) . I ns t ead, the5

G overnm entm us tpr ove onl yt hat“one of the n a tu ra l effe c ts [of the conduc tw as ] an obs t ruct i on of thatcomm er ce. ” Id . (em p h asis in o ri g inal). A cc o rdin g ly , R ey es’s argum ent fai l s. R ey es ar gues i n t he al t ernat i ve thatthe tr i al evi dence w as i ns uffi ci entt o pr ove an eff ecton i nt er s t at e comm er ce be y ond a r eas onabl e doubt . H ow ever , underthe H obbs A ct t he G ov ernm ent need n ot pr ov e an ac tual effecton i nter st at e com m erce. Inst ead, i tm ust o n lyp ro v e th a t th e u n d e rly in g ro b b e ry“ p o ten tiallyc a u se d a n e f f e c t o n in ter sta te comm er ce t o anydegr ee, how everm i ni m al ors l i ght . ” U r ban , 404 F. 3d at762; see al so H ayw ood , 3 6 3 F .3 d a t 2 1 1 n .7 ; U ni t ed Stat es v. C l aus en , 3 2 8 F . 3 d 7 0 8 , 7 1 0 -11 (3d C ir . 2 0 0 3 ) . F u r t h e r mo r e , a “ ‘ j u r yma yi n f e rth a ti n t e r s t a t e c o mme r c e wa s a f f e c t e d t o s o me m i ni m al degr ee f

r om a s how i ng t hatthe bus i nes s as s et s w er e depl et ed. ’ ” H ayw ood , 363 F. 3d at210 ( quot i ng U

ni t ed Stat es v. Zi egl er , 1 9 F .3 d 4 8 6 , 4 9 3 (1 0 th C ir. 1 9 9 4 )); see al so U r ban , 404 F. 3d at767 ( “[I ] ti s bey ond cavi l thatthe depl et i on of as s et s of a pe r s on en g ag ed in interstat e c o m m erc e h as a t l ea st a ‘po tential ’ ef fe ct on that p erso n ’s en g ag em en t i n interst ate c o m m erc e.”). A tt r i al , t he G overnm entpr es ent ed evi dence thatthe gr ocerys t or e i m por t ed p o rtio n s o f

its in v e n to ryf

ro m o th e r sta tes , an d w a s f o rc e d to c lo se f

o r a p p ro x im a tely ei ghthour s as a r es ul tof the r obbery . D ur i ng thi s per i od, the s t or e coul d notr ece i ve go od s fr om ou t -of- st at e ven do rs , sel l i t s goo ds t hat had b een d el i vered across s t at e l i nes, orperm i tcus t om er s t o us e i t s A T M m achi ne. Fur t herm or e, the r obberyi t s el f w as6

in ten d e d to ste a l m o n e yf ro m th e g ro c e rysto re , w h ich w o u ld h a v e d e p lete d its a v a ilab le a s s e ts a n d lim ite d its a b ility to e n g a g e in in te rs ta te tr a n s a c tio n s . B eca us e the G overnm entw as r equi r ed t o pr ove onl ya mi ni m al , pot ent i al eff ecton interst ate c o m m erc e, w e h o ld tha t i t pro v ided su ff ici en t evid en ce to su stai n R ey es’s c o n v ic tio n u n d e r t h e H o b b s A c t. B. R e y e s n e x t ar g u e s th a t th e H o b b s A c t is u n c o n stitu tio n a l “a s a p p lied ” to h is con du ct . F or suppo rt , he cit es U ni t ed Stat es v. Lopez , 514 U . S. 549 ( 1995) , w her e the Supr eme C our thel d t hata fe der al s t atut e pr ohi bi t i ng the pos s es s i on of a f i r earm i n a s chool zone w as uncons t i tut i onal . I n Lopez , the C our ti dent i fi ed thr ee c at egor i es of act i vi t yt hatm aybe r egul at ed underthe C om m er ce Cl aus e: 1) us e of the cha nnel s of i nt er s t at e comm er ce; 2) t he i ns t rum ent al i t i es of i nt er s t at e comm er ce; and 3) act i vi t i es t hat “s ubs t ant i al l yaff

ect ” i nt er s t at e comm er ce. I n chal l engi ng the cons t i tut i onal i t yof the H ob bs A ct , R ey es ar gu es that “[r ]obberyi s not a com m erci al act i vity . R ob beryi s a cr i m e. ” A ppel l ant ’ s B r . 23. T her efor e, R ey es adds , ourr equi r ementof onl ya mi ni m al eff ecton i nt er s t at e comm er ce c annotbe s quar ed w i t h Lopez . H e i s m i s t aken. B e c a u se R e y e s d id n o t ra ise th is a rg u m e n t b e f o re th e D istric t C o u rt, w e re v iew it o n ly f o r p la in e rr o r. See U

ni t ed Stat es v. B oone , 2 7 9 F . 3 d 1 6 3 , 1 7 4 n . 6 (3d C ir . 2 0 0 2 ). In anyevent , ourC our thas pr evi ous l yr ej ect ed s i m i l archal l enges t o t he H obbs A ctunder Lopez . See U

r ban , 4 0 4 F .3 d a t 7 6 6 (“ [ W ]e h a v e a lre a d yre jec ted th e a rg u m e n t th a t Lopez7

and i t s progen yrequi re pr oo f of a ‘s ub st anti al effect’ on com m erce i n an i nd i vidual case in o rde r t o sh o w a H o b b s A ct vio lat ion . ”). Fu rth erm o re, “[e ]ve n af ter Lopez , ev eryC o u rt o f A p p e a ls to h a v e a d d re ss e d th e iss u e h a s h e ld th a t th e H o b b s A c t m a yc o n stitu tio n a lly be appl i ed t o cr i m es w hi ch do nothave a s ubs t ant i al eff ecton i nt er s t at e comm er ce. ” C l aus en , 328 F. 3d at710. I n C l aus en , t he def

endant s “ar gue[d] thatthe H obbs A ct[w a] s uncons t i tut i onal as appl i ed t o a br oad ca t egoryof ca s es , i ncl udi ng thi s one, i n w hi ch the ef fec tof anygi ven r obberyon i nt er s t at e comm er ce w as m i ni m al . ” I d. a t 7 1 0 . W e re

jec ted th is a rg u m e n t, concl udi ng t hatt he H obbs A ct“r egul at e[d] act i vi t yw hi ch occ ur [r ed] l ocal l ybutw hi ch ha[d] an expl i ci tnexus w i t h i nt er s t at e comm er ce. ” Id a t 7 1 1 . W e a d d e d th a t th is r ender ed i t“di s t i ngui s habl e fr om t he s t atut e[] ati s s ue i n Lopez , ” and ther efor e “the D i s t r i ctC our tdi d noterrw hen i ti ns t ruct ed the j urythati tneed onl yfi nd thateac h r obberyhad a mi ni m al eff ecton i nt er s t at e comm er ce. ” I d. R ey es ’ s cons t i tut i onal chal l enge i s vi r tual l yi ndi s t i ngui s habl e fr om the cha l l enge w e r ej ect ed i n C l aus en . A s a r es ul t , R ey es cannotes t abl i s h err orunderourpr ece dent , l et alon e p lai n erro r. C. Fi nal l y , R ey es ar gues t hat : 1) por t i ons of the i ndi ctm entand j urychar ge ca n be re a d to su g g e st th a t a s p e c if ic in ten t to a f

f e c t in ter sta te c o m m e rc e w a s a re q u ire d e lem e n t; an d , ac co rdin g ly , 2 ) th e later p o rt ion o f th e jurych arg e— in w h ich th e D istri ct C o u rt8

in stru c ted th e ju ryth a t itd id n o t h a v e to f in d th a t R e y e s in ten d e d to a f f e c t in ter sta te comm er ce— bot h caus ed the ver di ctt o be “a tvar i ance ” w i t h t he i ndi ctm ent , and r es ul t ed in “ c o n f u sin g ” a n d “ in c o n sis ten t” in stru c tio n s. W e re v iew th e se c laim s o n lyf o r p lain e rr o r b e c a u s e R e y e s f

a ile d to ra is e th e m b e f

o re th e D is tr ic t C o u rt . See U ni t ed Stat es v. A nt i co , 275 F. 3d 245, 265 ( 3d C i r . 2001) . I n anyevent , R ey es i s m i s t aken. T he indi ct m ent charged him as fol l ow s: T hom as R ey es at t empt ed t o obs t ruct , del ay [, ] and af fec tcomm er ce a nd the m o v e m e n t o f

a rticle s a n d c o m m o d iti e s in c o m m e rc e , b yro b b e ry , [b y ] u n law f u lly at t em pt[i ng ] t o take and ob t ai n cash f rom the G om ez G roceryl ocated at82 E ast W al nutL ane, Phi l adel phi a, Penns y l vani a i n t he pr es ence of empl oy ees of the G om ez G r oceryand aga i ns tthei rw i l l , bym eans of ac tual and thr eat ened f or ce, vi ol ence , and fe arof i nj ur y , i m m edi at e and f utur e, t o t he empl oy ees of the G om ez G r ocery , t hati s , bybr andi s hi ng and di s char gi ng a gun, demandi ng m oney , and t h r e a t e n i n g e m p l o ye e s o f t h e G o m e z G r o c e r y. T he i ndi ctm entfur t heral l eged that“the G om ez G r oceryw as engage d i n and af fec t i ng interst ate c o m m erc e, pro v iding fo o d an d d ri n k , o r go o d s an d serv ices, w h ich w ere pr oduced a nd t r ans por t ed fr om ot hers t at es t o Penns y l vani a, t o r es i dent s of the C om m onw eal t h of Penns y l vani a and out - of- s t at e r es i dent s . ” Ther efor e, the i ndi ctm ent p r o p e r l y c h a r g e d R e ye s w i t h H o b b s A c tr o b b e r y. Fur t herm or e, t he cha r ge t o t he j uryacc ur at el ys t at ed the l aw and w as not i nco nsi st ent w i t h the i nd i ct m ent. In r el evan tpart , the C ou rti nst ruct ed the j uryas fol l ow s: T h e d e f e n d a n t n e e d n o t h a v e in ten d e d o r a n ticip a ted a n e f f e c t o n in ter sta te co m m erc e. Y o u m ayfin d the e ff ec t as a n atura l con seq u en ce o f h is acti o n s. If y o u f in d th a t th e d e f

e n d a n t in ten d e d to tak e c e rta in a c tio n s, th a t is, h e d id th e a c ts char ged i n t he i ndi ctm enti n or dert o obt ai n pr oper t y , and y ou fi nd thos e ac t i ons have e i t hercaus ed orw oul d pr obabl ycaus e an e ffe cton i nt er s t at e comm er ce no9

m at t erhow m i ni m al , t hen y ou m ayfi nd the r equi r ement s of thi s el ements at i s fi ed. R ey es does notoffe ranypas s ages t hatper s uade us thata r eas onabl e tr i erof fa ctw oul d be c o n f u se d b ya n ya lleg e d in c o n sis ten c ies in th e in d ictm e n t an d th e ju ryin stru c tio n s. B o th t he i ndi ctm entand the j ur yi ns t ruct i ons pr es entthe r el evantl aw acc ur at el yand, r ead to g e th e r, ar e c o n sis ten t. I n or dert o pr evai l , a def endantm us tpr ove thatther e w as “a ‘ var i ance ’ betw een t he i ndi ctm entand the pr oof att r i al , t o t he pr ej udi ce of the def endant ’ s s ubs t ant i al r i ght s . ” U

nited S tates v. B arr , 9 6 3 F . 2 d 6 4 1 , 6 4 8 (3d C ir . 1 9 9 2 ). W e have r ecogni zed a “vari ance” on l yi n si tuati on s w here the ev i den ce attri al proves facts otherthan tho se a lle g e d in th e in d ic tm e n t. I d. R e y e s h a s f

a ile d to e s ta b lis h e ith e r a v a ri a n c e o r p re ju d ic e . A s n o ted a b o v e , the G o v e rn m e n t o f f e re d e v id e n c e th a t m a n yo f th e item s s o ld in t he G om ez G r oceryw er e pur chas ed fr om ot hers t at es . A s a r es ul tof the att empt ed ro b b e ry , the sto re c lo se d d o w n f o r e ig h t h o u rs, w h ich k e p t itf ro m re c e iv in g o u t-o f

-sta te goods oral l ow i ng i t s cus t om er s t o us e i t s A T M m achi ne. Fur t herm or e, had R ey es s ucce s s ful l ycompl et ed the r obbery , he w oul d have s t ol en moneyfr om the G om ez G ro c e ry , the re f

o re d e p letin g a ss e ts th a t w o u ld h a v e b e e n a v a ilab le to e n g a g e in in ter sta te t r ans act i ons . T hi s evi dence al l s uppor t s a convi ct i on forH obbs A ctr obbery— t he relev an t cri m e c h arg ed in the ind ict m en t. F u rth erm o re, no thing in the ind ict m en t or j u ry i ns t ruct i ons s ugges t s anyconfus i on aboutthe under l y i ng offe ns e orthe el ement s thathad to b e p ro v e n a t trial— in c lu d in g sp e c if ic in ten t.10 * * * * * Fort hes e r eas ons , w e r ej ecteac h of R ey es ’ s chal l enges , and af fi r m the j udgm ent o f th e D istric t C o u rt.