Opinion ID: 76722
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Pipkins's Conduct was Extortion

Text: 68 Pipkins contends that his conduct did not amount to extortion; this contention is meritless. Extortion is the obtaining of property from another, with his consent, induced by wrongful use of actual or threatened force, violence, or fear.... 18 U.S.C. § 1951(b)(2). According to Pipkins, the juvenile females voluntarily turned over their prostitution earnings to him as part of the rules of the game, which they knew about prior to beginning their independent contractor relationship with him. Therefore, he argues, the money never belonged to the prostitutes, and thus, any force or violence Pipkins used to extract his money from his prostitutes could not constitute extortion. 69 Pipkins's view of the facts is belied by the record. JF33 testified that she gave all of her money earned through prostitution to Pipkins because she had no choice, as Pipkins would beat her if she kept the proceeds for herself. When Pipkins learned that she had kept earnings, Pipkins hit her. JF5 also turned over all of the money she earned prostituting for fear of Pipkins beating her. These earnings were substantial: one night, Pipkins required her to meet a quota of $1,000. 70 Pipkins instituted and perpetuated a system in which his juvenile prostitutes turned over their earnings because of his threats and physical violence. This supports Pipkins's convictions on the Hobbs Acts extortion charges. 71