LegalCaseDocs.com
shopping cart  
  |     
Search
 

 
New Visitors


 VeriSign Secure Site

 Get Adobe Reader

UNITED STATES v JEFFREY ROWE Click to find out why . . .



Keywords & Phrases
CaseNo: USVJR148185, CourtName: US DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Plaintiff: UNITED STATES, State: VA Virginia, UniqueCaseRef: LCD>USVJR148185, Interstate Commerce, United States, Vehicle, Evidence, Activity Affecting, Affecting Interstate, Jones, Business Purpose, Instrumentalities, Affects Interstate Commerce, Stipulation, Travel, Cir, Employment, Meaning, Conviction, Appeals, Rowe, Provision, Personal Vehicle, Ross, Eastern District, Congress, Virginia, District Court, Interstate Commerce Connection, Appellee, Webbs, Commerce Clause, Regulation, Foreign Commerce, Arson, Channels, Jurisdiction, Automobile, Alonzo, Shirley, Fire , ContentID: 120249341

Case Documents
1   APPELLANT BRIEF
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 121409
28 pages
PDF
2 2001-06-07 COURT OF APPEALS DECISION
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 121410
4 pages
PDF
Total Documents: 2 documents , 32 pages
Price: $ 24.95


IVESLCD01 KGI0001
 
 

 Forgot your password?


1 . APPELLANT BRIEF

EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
UNITED STATES
VEHICLE
DEFENDANT
ACTIVITY AFFECTING
EVIDENCE
COURT
AFFECTING INTERSTATE
JONES
BUSINESS PURPOSE
INSTRUMENTALITIES
AFFECTS INTERSTATE COMMERCE
STIPULATION
TRAVEL
CIR
EMPLOYMENT
MEANING
CONVICTION
APPEALS
PROVISION
PERSONAL VEHICLE
EASTERN DISTRICT
CONGRESS
VIRGINIA
INTERSTATE COMMERCE CONNECTION
APPELLEE
COMMERCE CLAUSE
REGULATION
FOREIGN COMMERCE
CHANNELS
                                           No. 00-4458

                             IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
                                        _______________

                                  UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                                     Appellee

                                               v.

                                        JEFFREY ROWE,

                                                     Defendant-Appellant
                                        _______________

            ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
                             FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA
                                     ALEXANDRIA DIVISION
                                        _______________

                    BRIEF FOR THE UNITED STATES AS APPELLEE
                                        _______________

                                                     BILL LANN LEE
                                                       Assistant Attorney General

                                                     JESSICA DUNSAY SILVER
                                                     KEVIN RUSSELL
                                                       Attorneys
                                                       Department of Justice
                                                       P.O. Box 66078
                                                       Washington, D.C.  20035-6078
                                                       (202) 305-4584




                                     TABLE OF CONTENTS

                                                                                                   

ISSUES PRESENTED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

STATUTORY PROVISION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

STATEMENT OF THE CASE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

SNIPPETS:
  • IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
  • ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
  • FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA
  • BRIEF FOR THE UNITED STATES AS APPELLEE
  • PROVISION
  • DEFENDANT IS BOUND BY HIS STIPULATION
  • SECTION 844CONVICTION AND HAS WAIVED
  • A PERSONAL VEHICLE USED FOR INTERSTATE
  • TRAVEL TO A PLACE OF EMPLOYMENT IS USED
  • IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE AND AN ACTIVITY
  • MEANING OF SECTION 844
  • Under Jones A Vehicle Must Be Actively
  • Employed In An Activity Affecting Commerce
  • Affecting Interstate Commerce Even If It Is
  • Not Used For A Business Purpose
  • Employment Affects Interstate Commerce
  • THE EVIDENCE WAS SUFFICIENT TO SUPPORT
  • 146 F.2d 751 (4th Cir.

  • 2 . COURT OF APPEALS DECISION

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    ROSS
    VEHICLE
    UNITED STATES
    DISTRICT COURT
    INTERSTATE COMMERCE
    WEBBS
    ARSON
    EVIDENCE
    JURISDICTION
    AUTOMOBILE
    ALONZO
    SHIRLEY
    FIRE
    CONTENDS
    TESTIFYING
    HOUSE
    BOTTLE
    STIPULATION
    CIRCUIT
    DISTRICT JUDGE
    AFFIRM
    CONVICTIONS
    NEXUS
    DESTROY
    ASSERTS
    INSUFFICIENT
    GUEST
    TOWNHOUSE COMPLEX
    JEWELL
    
                             UNPUBLISHED
         UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
                       Plaintiff-Appellee,
                     v.                               No. 00-4458
    JEFFREY ROWE, Defendant-Appellant.
               Appeal from the United States District Court
             for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria.
                 James C. Cacheris, Senior District Judge.
                                 (CR-99-446)
    
                           Submitted: June 7, 2001
    
                            Decided: July 5, 2001
    
           Before WILKINS and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and
           Andre M. DAVIS, United States District Judge for the
                District of Maryland, sitting by designation.
    
    
    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    
    
                                 COUNSEL
    
    Alan H. Yamamoto, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellant. Bill Lann
    Lee, Assistant Attorney General, Jessica Dunsay Silver, Kevin Rus-
    sell, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington,
    D.C., for Appellee.
    
    
    
    2                         UNITED STATES v. ROWE
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See
    Local Rule 36(c).
    
    
                                   OPINION
    
    PER CURIAM:
    
         Jeffrey Rowe appeals his convictions on two counts of arson of
    motor vehicles. See 18 U.S.C.A. § 844(i) (West 2000). He contends
    that the district court lacked jurisdiction over these charges because
    there was no sufficient nexus between the destroyed vehicles and
    interstate commerce. He further asserts that there was insufficient evi-
    dence that he perpetrated these offenses. Finding no merit in these
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
  • Before WILKINS and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and Andre M. DAVIS, United States District Judge
  • Jeffrey Rowe appeals his convictions on two counts of arson of motor vehicles.
  • He contends that the district court lacked jurisdiction over these charges because there was
  • He further asserts that there was insufficient evidence that he perpetrated these offenses.
  • Rowe was a frequent guest at the home of Brian Ross, who lived in the same townhouse complex
  • Ross testified that Rowe acted on these statements twice, once by slashing Alonzo Webb's
  • Other evidence suggested that Rowe was hostile to the Webbs because of their race.
  • Jewell went to sleep after the other guests left, while Rowe stayed up and collected the
  • Between 3:00 and 4:00 in the morning on October 31, a resident of the townhouse complex
  • After the fire, Alonzo Webb found an unexploded Molotov cocktail near his automobile, which
  • Investigators discovered the remnants of a second Molotov cocktail, this one made from a
  • He then expressed dissatisfaction with the results of the arson:
  • Testifying in his own defense, Rowe denied all of the allegations against him.
  • Section 844prohibits "maliciously damagor destroy[ing], or attemptto damage or destroy, by
  • Rowe contends that the Webbs' vehicles were not used in interstate commerce; thus, he
  • He now contends, however, that the nexus with interstate commerce is a jurisdictional
  • Rowe next asserts that the evidence was insufficient to prove his involvement in the arson of
  • we affirm the judgment of the district court.
  •    |