Task: songer_geniss

What follows is an opinion from a United States Court of Appeals.
Your task is to identify the issue in the case, that is, the social and/or political context of the litigation in which more purely legal issues are argued. Put somewhat differently, this field identifies the nature of the conflict between the litigants. The focus here is on the subject matter of the controversy rather than its legal basis. Consider the following categories: "criminal" (including appeals of conviction, petitions for post conviction relief, habeas corpus petitions, and other prisoner petitions which challenge the validity of the conviction or the sentence), "civil rights" (excluding First Amendment or due process; also excluding claims of denial of rights in criminal proceeding or claims by prisoners that challenge their conviction or their sentence (e.g., habeas corpus petitions are coded under the criminal category); does include civil suits instituted by both prisoners and callable non-prisoners alleging denial of rights by criminal justice officials), "First Amendment", "due process" (claims in civil cases by persons other than prisoners, does not include due process challenges to government economic regulation), "privacy", "labor relations", "economic activity and regulation", and "miscellaneous".

PER CURIAM:
This is an appeal from a dismissal of a motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to set aside a conviction in February 1971 on two counts of an information charging violation of an injunction entered in December 1968. We affirm.
Appellant was president of a Nevada corporation which encountered difficulties with the Securities and Exchange Commission over the sale of unregistered securities. In a civil action, the district court permanently enjoined appellant and other corporate officers from using the mails to sell corporate stock, unless it was exempted from the provisions of Section 5 of the Securities Act, 15 U.S.C. § 77e.
Nine months later appellant and others were indicted for conspiracy and sale of unregistered stock, and appellant was charged in two counts with offering to sell “certain [unregistered] securities, to wit, promissory notes . . . ” There followed extended delays and pretrial appearances. After a jury had been impaneled, appellant appeared with counsel and agreed with the government to plead guilty to a superseding information charging him in two counts with a violation of the 1968 injunction. The court accepted the plea after a careful inquiry into the voluntariness of the plea.
Appellant now claims that the promissory notes were exempted from registration and that the information failed to charge him with a crime. The district judge denied his § 2255 application without a hearing.
The information stated a crime under 18 U.S.C. § 402 and Morgan’s plea was a binding admission of all facts alleged therein. See e. g., North Carolina v. Alford, 400 U.S. 25, 37, 91 S.Ct. 160, 27 L.Ed.2d 162 (1970); McCarthy v. United States, 394 U.S. 459, 466, 89 S.Ct. 1166, 22 L.Ed.2d 418 (1969); Davis v. United States, 347 F.2d 374, 375 (9th Cir. 1965); Thomas v. United States, 290 F.2d 696, 697 (9th Cir. 1961).
The order denying the motion to set aside the convictions is affirmed.

Question: What is the general issue in the case?
A. criminal
B. civil rights
C. First Amendment
D. due process
E. privacy
F. labor relations
G. economic activity and regulation
H. miscellaneous
Answer:

Answer: A