Judge Scheindlin
http://nycourts.law.com/CourtDocumentViewer.asp?view=Document&docID=118377
A TWO-count indictment charged defendant with conspiring to commit, and committing, a Hobbs Act robbery—affecting interstate commerce—in connection with a 2007 robbery of untaxed cigarettes from a van. The court denied the indictment’s dismissal. In rejecting defendant’s claim that the government’s allegation of interference with interstate commerce was defective, the court, informed by the Second Circuit’s decision in United States v. Alphonse, found the indictment satisfied “basic pleading requirements” by properly pleading the elements of the offenses charged and fairly informing him of the charges to be defended against. The indictment was not required to include information as to the number of cigarettes in the van, whether the victim engaged in interstate commerce, nor whether the cigarettes were goods being used in a business owned or operated by the victim. The court also rejected defendant’s claim that the government’s proof at trial should be limited to the allegations in the indictment’s narrowing “to wit” clause. It deemed premature defendant’s claim that to do otherwise would constructively amend the indictment against him.
