Summary
Taylor v. United States, 579 U.S. ___ (2016), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that in a federal criminal prosecution under the Hobbs Act, the government is not required to prove an interstate commerce element beyond a reasonable doubt.[1][2][not verified in body] The Court relied on its decision in Gonzales v. Raich (2005) which held that Congress has the authority to regulate the marijuana market given that even local activities can have a "substantial effect" on interstate commerce.[not verified in body]
| Taylor v. United States | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Argued February 23, 2016 Decided June 20, 2016 | |
| Full case name | David Anthony Taylor, Petitioner v. United States |
| Docket no. | 14-6166 |
| Citations | 579 U.S. ___ (more) 136 S. Ct. 2074; 195 L. Ed. 2d 456 |
| Opinion announcement | Opinion announcement |
| Case history | |
| Prior | United States v. Taylor, 754 F.3d 217 (4th Cir. 2014) |
| Holding | |
| In a federal criminal prosecution under the Hobbs Act, the government is not required to prove an interstate commerce element beyond a reasonable doubt. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Alito, joined by Roberts, Kennedy, Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor, Kagan |
| Dissent | Thomas |
| Laws applied | |
| Hobbs Act | |
Background
editDavid Anthony Taylor performed two home-invasion robberies with the intent of stealing from two perceived marijuana dealers in Roanoke, Virginia. When initially tried in federal court, the jury deadlocked because of arguments that the marijuana in question was grown and intended for use within Virginia. Taylor was then retried where the judge precluded that line of argument and convicted. The high court upheld that conviction.
Opinion of the Court
editAssociate Justice Samuel Alito authored the majority opinion.[2][further explanation needed]