Robbing a Drug Trafficking Business Violates Hobbs Act Even Though Business is Illegal

U.S. v. Rutland, 2013 WL 221438 (1/22/13) (Wyo.) (Published) - A robbery of a drug trafficking business satisfies the interstate commerce requirement of the Hobbs Act because illegal drug businesses are still businesses. The 10th notes some circuits have adopted a heightened interstate commerce standard when robbery of an individual is involved. But lots of circuits apparently treat criminal organizations, even solo drug dealers, as businesses thus triggering a looser standard. But in this case the standard doesn't matter. The evidence showed the victim was targeted at least in part in his capacity as a drug dealer. While part of the motive may have been to get a gun back that was a friend's, the defendant also wanted to steal drugs and drug proceeds. The robbery depleted the assets of a drug dealer who got his drugs from out of state.

The 10th reaffirmed its strong preference for a pretrial James hearing on the admissibility of co-conspiracy hearsay, but finds no error in the d. ct.'s admission of various statements during trial. The 10th finds there were two overlapping conspiracies, one to rob the drug dealer and the other to deal drugs. The statements were admissible if they were made by a conspirator to further either conspiracy because the robbery was linked to the drug conspiracy. Only one co-conspirator need commit an overt act. A conspirator's statement that he was going to get his gun from the victim was admissible as res gestae evidence to show how the conspiracy began and thus was not hearsay. To top it all off, many of the statements were made by people who testified at trial - the 10th has said any error in admitting co-conspirator statements is harmless when the declarant is subject to cross examination at trial.