The following excerpt is from U.S. v. Delacorte, 113 F.3d 1243 (9th Cir. 1997):
Here both of the challenged instructions accurately stated the requirements of 1951(a) by requiring proof of a potential impact on interstate commerce. Instruction number 29 required proof of a "probable or potential" impact on interstate commerce, tracking the language of several of the above cases. Instruction number 26, requiring that commerce "was or would have been affected" by the robbery, also required a potential impact and tracked the language of United States v. Pascucci, 943 F.2d 1032 (9th Cir.1991).
V. Sufficiency of the Evidence
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.