Court Opinion

ID: 9489091
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-05 13:05:32.45578+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:53:18.971729
License: Public Domain

McMILLIAN, Circuit Judge,
dissenting.
I respectfully dissent from Part I of the majority opinion. Although I believe an ATM can be and ordinarily is an instrument used in interstate commerce, I find, under the circumstances of the present ease, the use was neither caused by appellant nor has a sufficient nexus to the offense to fall within the jurisdictional limits of the Travel Act. Here, the use of the ATM was suggested by Crawford and the use was entirely incidental and fortuitous. Hence, I would reverse the conviction because the use of the ATM was in no way a part of the plan or scheme to carry out an extortion.