Court Opinion

ID: 9843215
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-24 02:30:51.363016+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:15:01.905660
License: Public Domain

CALABRESI, Circuit Judge,
concurring:
I join in the Opinion of the Court in all particulars except as to Part IV(B) of the Discussion section (concerning Dhinsa’s challenge to his conviction on count 11 for threatening to murder Balwant in violation of N.Y. Penal Law § 135.65 (Coercion in the First Degree)). With respect to this part of the opinion, I concur in the result only.
The VICAR statute can indeed be read as the majority reads it. It could also be read, however, to make it a federal crime to “attemptf ] or conspire! ],” in the relevant situation, to “murder! ], kidnap! ], maim! ], assault! ] with a dangerous weapon, commit! ] assault resulting in serious bodily injury, or threaten! ] to commit a crime of violence against any individual in violation of the laws of any State or the United States.” 18 U.S.C. § 1959(a). The government has not argued in favor of this reading, and, more important, the jury was not charged with respect to it. Under the circumstances, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of one interpretation over the other, I agree with the majority that the conviction on count 11 cannot stand.