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.
Walter Clemons was convicted of violating 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a) and (d) by robbing a federally insured savings and loan association, and in the course of the robbery assaulting a teller and putting her life in jeopardy by use of a dangerous weapon. He was sentenced to twenty-three years imprisonment, and now appeals.
His only contention on appeal is that the government did not introduce evidence sufficient to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the savings institution involved, the Blue Valley Federal Savings and Loan Association, was federally insured.
The government produced the association’s certificate of insurance issued by the Federal Home Loan Bank. The certificate was identified by a vice president of the association. The government also introduced a premium notice and cancelled check issued in payment thereof for 1975, the year of the robbery. In addition, the parties stipulated that this premium had in fact been paid. This evidence was plainly sufficient to support a finding that the association was federally insured at the time of the robbery. United States v. Merrill, 484 F.2d 168, 169-70 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 414 U.S. 1077, 94 S.Ct. 594, 38 L.Ed.2d 484 (1973); Scruggs v. United States, 450 F.2d 359, 361 (8th Cir. 1971), cert. denied, 405 U.S. 1071, 92 S.Ct. 1521, 31 L.Ed.2d 804 (1972). Appellant’s contention is thus without merit.
The judgment of conviction 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