Whether the lower courts erred in determining that the scheme involved in this case did not affect 'interstate commerce' as required by the Hobbs Act

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED . 1) PERV OSbLSECTS Ts The Lower Courts dereamimaros Ther PANower ST pulared : . ; . ¢/ OT THAW Thar The Scheme pruyoived © Wine Com MIM CT OIL HEF eCTING INT C“STUTO_ — €OMMerce“ YPexitiawen AcgvesS That The Lower , COLTS deeaisiss esaFucrs wih established , Precedeur 62 The Supreme. eyorr Resutiosgy , . Ino ow Fund amestaL mis Canmrage GF Susyce_ e)) WHETHER THE Facer STEST hoSS” Amo sTED ATTRIBUTED BY THE OWITAD STATES SERTENUNG GoidE limes AT PBI Ca) Gi) QaLl CLO) O) . (301-2 Cd) eonstrares ELEM EMTS OF THE | CHAR GED OFFENSE. NECESSARY TO MICREASE | THE Loss OF LIBERTY Based Vead THE STATUTORY Nimom and MAXIM . AlleWep BY Law. SEE: AlLeWwe v. ) ONITEY STATES S72 V6. 94% 1OP S_ eT. : AIST IBSEL Ed, Od. 314 C2013)APPREN OS _ ~ — c VM NEW SERSEY S30 Os. 466 /20 S.cT a3 4UP “YQ? LEA AS. 435. C2008)? | | . co