Fill and Sign the Instruction Interference with Form

56.2 Interference With Commerce By Extortion Hobbs Act - - Racketeering (Color Of Official Right) 18 USC § 1951(a) Title 18, United States Code 1951(a), makes it a Federal crime or offense for anyone to extort something from someone else and in doing so to interfere with interstate commerce. The Defendant can be found guilty of that offense only if all of the following facts are proved beyond a reasonable doubt: First: That the Defendant induced the person described in the indictment to part with property; Second: That the Defendant did so knowingly and willfully by means of " extortion," as hereafter defined; and Third: That the extortionate transaction delayed, interrupted or adversely affected interstate commerce. The term " property" includes not only money and other tangible things of value, but also includes any intangible right considered as a source or element of income or wealth. The term " extort ion," in this context , means the wrongful acquisition of property from someone else under color of official right. Extort ion " under color of official right" is the wrongful taking or receipt by a public officer of property not due to the officer knowing that the payment or property was taken or received in return for [performing] [withholding] official acts. The term " wrongful" means to obtain property unfairly and unjustly by one having no lawful claim to it. While it is not necessary to prove that the Defendant specifically intended to interfere with interstate commerce, it is necessary that the Government prove that t he natural consequences of the acts alleged in the indictment would be to delay, interrupt or adversely affect " interstate commerce," which means the flow of commerce or business activities between two or more states. You are instructed that you may find that the requisite affect upon interstate commerce has been proved if you find beyond a reasonable doubt that [describe affect on commerce alleged in the indictment on which proof was offered at trial, e.g. , that the banks described in the indictment were formed for the purpose of doing business both within and without the State Florida, and actually did business out side the St ate of Florida]. ANNOTATIONS AND COMMENTS 18 USC § 19 51 (a) provides: (a) Whoever in any way or degree obstructs, delays, or affects commerce or the movement of any article or commodity in commerce, . . . by extortion [shall be guilty of an offense against the United States]. 18 USC § 19 51 (b)(2) provides: The term " extort ion" means the obtaining of property from another, wit h his consent, induced by wrongful use of actual or threatened force, violence, or fear, or under color of official right. Maximum Penalty: Twenty (20) years imprisonment and applicable fine. In United States v. Martinez, 14 F.3d 543 (11 th Cir. 1994), the Eleventh Circuit acknowledged that a Hobbs Act conviction for extortion under color of official right requires proof of a quid pro quo. See Unit ed States v. Evans, 504 U.S. 255, 112 S.Ct . 18 81 , 1 19 L.Ed.2d 5 7 (1 99 2); McCormick v . United States, 500 U.S. 257, 111 S.Ct . 1807, 114 L.Ed.2d 307 (1991). Fulfillment of the quid pro quo is not an element of the offense.