Is this actually a federal crime? (jewelry store robbery)

May 19, 2020 9:19 AM

This news article reports on a jewelry store robbed a couple weeks ago. The suspects shot a guard and stole Rolex watches. They're being charged with a federal crime: "What elevated this to a federal case was the disruption of interstate commerce, the affidavit says. After investigators talked to Stokes, they learned the stolen merchandise, both recovered and not recovered, totaled $207,000. The watches were made in Switzerland, imported to New York and then shipped to the store in Austin, the affidavit says."

This seems like quite a stretch to me. If this holds true, how is not every robbery of a store where the merchandise wasn't made within that state "disruption of interstate commerce"? What's the likelihood these charges will be dropped/reduced and only state charges (is that what you'd call it?) would apply? I'm obviously missing something (ya know, like a thorough understanding of how the law works).

posted by spikeleemajortomdickandharryconnickjrmints to Law & Government (3 answers total)

Yes, that can be charged federally. Because the stolen items are things, not cash, it’s easy to prove they were involved in interstate commerce. Whether something is charged by the feds or a state isn’t a matter of severity alone, it also has some political factors ( who has time and staffing, who can get it done faster, possible sentences, and so on)
posted by kerf at 9:25 AM on May 19, 2020 [1 favorite]

I believe this particular charge came about via the Hobbs Act.

Under this theory, interstate commerce is affected when an enterprise, which either is actively engaged in interstate commerce or customarily purchases items in interstate commerce, has its assets depleted through extortion, thereby curtailing the victim's potential as a purchaser of such goods.

how is not every robbery of a store where the merchandise wasn't made within that state "disruption of interstate commerce"?

I think significant disruption of business is required. If you steal a t-shirt from Walmart, you aren't going to cause Walmart to close down. The feds are claiming this robbery caused the jewelry store to operate at limited capacity.
posted by muddgirl at 9:28 AM on May 19, 2020 [1 favorite]

It looks like Hobbs Act robbery like muddgirl said. The extent to which any activity can escape the ambit of the Interstate Commerce Clause is controversial, and complicated. I believe that as far as criminal jurisdiction, the leading case on this topic is U.S. v. Lopez, if you're interested on the limits of federal jurisdiction. But as a practical matter, federal prosecutors generally steer clear of minor crimes. Anything involving active use of a firearm combined with some other major crime (drug distribution, robbery, etc.) is much more likely to attract their attention.

Once someone has been indicted in federal court, it's very unlikely that the case will go away entirely, or that the feds would drop it and let the state pursue the charges by itself. But as part of a plea agreement, it's very possible that some charges would be dropped.
posted by skewed at 10:02 AM on May 19, 2020 [1 favorite]