Court Opinion

ID: 9806080
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-31 18:38:30.136858+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T10:55:53.450129
License: Public Domain

WILLIAM PRYOR, Circuit Judge,
concurring:
Not surprisingly, I concur in full, but I write separately because I would hold that venue was proper in Georgia on an alternative ground too. Kopp’s crime was a “continuing offense,” 18 U.S.C. § 3237(a), subject to prosecution anywhere that Kopp traveled. Any offense that involves “transportation in interstate ... commerce” is a “continuing offense and, except as otherwise expressly provided by enactment of Congress, may be inquired of and prosecuted in any district from, through, or into which such commerce ... moves.” Id. Section 2250 requires that a defendant “travel[ ] in interstate ... commerce,” id. § 2250, so a violation is a continuing offense. Accordingly, Kopp can be prosecut*990ed in Georgia under either provision of section 3237(a).