United States v. Celaj
649 F.3d 162
| 2d Cir. | 2011Background
- Celaj was convicted after a nine‑day jury trial of multiple Hobbs Act offenses, weapon charges, and related conspiracy and fraud counts; the judgment sentenced him to 601 months imprisonment.
- The government proved, via wire intercepts and witnesses, that Celaj led a NYC gang engaging in car thefts, drug dealing, and armed robberies beginning in 2007.
- The conspiracy and robberies involved staged undercover police pretexts to rob narcotics dealers, including a Bronx home invasion and a Long Island attempt on a drug dealer’s residence.
- A stipulation admitted by the parties stated that marijuana is grown outside New York and travels in interstate and foreign commerce to reach the New York City area, used in lieu of a DEA witness on interstate nexus.
- Celaj argued the stipulation was insufficient to prove interstate commerce nexus for Hobbs Act jurisdiction; he also challenged the Knierim attempted robbery as authority would require the defendant to be present.
- On appeal Celaj contends the district court erred in denying Rule 29(a) motions and that Knierim's absence at the home barred Attempted Robbery conviction under the Rizzo framework.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the interstate commerce element was proven | Celaj asserts the stipulation alone fails to show a de minimis nexus to interstate commerce. | Celaj contends the stipulation, plus his statements, are insufficient to prove interstate commerce nexus for Hobbs Act. | Sufficient nexus found; stipulation plus testimony supports de minimis effect on interstate commerce. |
| Whether Knierim attempted robbery conviction stands under Rizzo | Celaj claims lack of Knierim’s presence defeats attempt liability per Rizzo. | Celaj contends the district court misapplied Rizzo to require presence at the target. | Conviction for Hobbs Act attempted robbery sustained; substantial step shown toward robbery. |
| Whether the Rule 29(a) denial as to Hobbs Act charges was proper | Celaj argues insufficiency warrants acquittal on Hobbs Act counts. | Celaj maintains evidence sufficed to sustain jury verdict. | District Court correctly denied Rule 29(a) motion; evidence sufficient. |
| Whether marijuana’s interstate nature can be inferred for jurisdiction | Stipulation suffices to show interstate nature of marijuana trade. | Marijuana alone cannot establish interstate nexus; need more proof. | Stipulation plus defendant’s statements adequate to establish nexus. |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Parkes, 497 F.3d 220 (2d Cir. 2007) (de minimis nexus suffices to prove interstate commerce in Hobbs Act cases)
- United States v. Elias, 285 F.3d 183 (2d Cir. 2002) (burden of proving nexus to interstate commerce is de minimis)
- United States v. Perrotta, 313 F.3d 33 (2d Cir. 2002) (any interference with interstate commerce suffices for Hobbs Act)
- United States v. Needham, 604 F.3d 673 (2d Cir. 2010) (drug trafficking alone not automatically affect interstate commerce; requires nexus proof)
- United States v. Yousef, 327 F.3d 56 (2d Cir. 2003) (substantial step standard for attempt crimes)
- People v. Rizzo, 246 N.Y. 334, 158 N.E. 888 (N.Y. 1927) (dangerous proximity rule for attempted crimes; not controlling federal law here)