Whether the Hobbs Act's prohibition on interference with commerce by threats or violence is unconstitutionally vague as applied to the facts of this case

No question identified. : __ Je dG) The. qusstons Presented tar revie) Te _/95), thterference with Gammerce by threats a arerter ce (ite Corman cs fo Hei — Ie) caccmentS cons pracy to Obsiruct Commerce. x jhe neko of offence Taifele by meensoh Violence Gnd shee OF Tas be Rich {s similar ae arg.oge USee 1 ooh) F {48}, Coin —— 85 P SURE HHION CON = _ (take Cc Clerical error, pursuant to Rule 3G ¢ TI O08 emmesrd ¢ Woon OF nojue. Of / Ta eens oa aoe > dericcl , | | a a > 9 | _ le 4 YA teh all parties to the procatin ig Nh ol eres Be FRETS LTavIeW Mourice f 20 nels ( Apcellont ) Ville For OPO Beso —“—sSOC“(‘“‘ fe p Soocise Sictemerr of the Oo pees risdictior koe Ge cil oelamd cod calkdged trate c= ion tS) ule , eniec Ex bt AY | ee _ & The Agocellont more the Cnited stedes District eet een Diblick OF Ronda (ia Dis i} ) &% FT 1: tO ADA LIA CIR-ALL oie — Rciredion of ferent cktgModk Im.c, Crinincl Cose_ coun) two) Cind +1 Sipe fo Bie BG, perieininats yolure or _oFR pelercones 5 =aeal hon oF anidchoree) Tiel chon Number. ls ppisec BIEN dak, US SbSghoG) OF panlionte ne twp) gna) five oF Camibal indi een Pe then via) |981 tkerkerence Li ——— erce ly Hares or Violexe LFederal Revised CMe owe or Gtesctings prekthon To prevent cq | ierions OF akc to Cry park Sentence — _ under SiWiler Grcumstences Gan ne ee SP undrmnning the Piblic corto tye Marcial PocssS 3) Respectfully 2.0 Hed (Signcatue. Y Manes SStmch 80/00 00 a