Der KI-Arbeitsbereich für Juristen
- Rechtsrecherche mit Zugriff auf über 1 Million Quellen
- Dokumentenautomatisierung
- Mandatsverwaltung
- Gehostet in der EU und der Schweiz
14 Tage kostenlos testen (10 Fragen/Tag während der Testphase)
Der KI-Arbeitsbereich für Juristen
14 Tage kostenlos testen (10 Fragen/Tag während der Testphase)
13-13011•USA v. Al J. Hurley
[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________
No. 13-13011
________________________
D.C. Docket No. 1:12-cr-00015-WLS-TQL-1
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
AL J. HURLEY,
Defendant - Appellant.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Middle District of Georgia
________________________
(October 20, 2014)
Before WILSON, ROSENBAUM, Circuit Judges, and SCHLESINGER∗, District
Judge.
∗ Honorable Harvey E. Schlesinger, United States District Judge for the Middle District
of Florida, sitting by designation.
Case: 13-13011 Date Filed: 10/20/2014 Page: 1 of 2
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Appellant Al J. Hurley was a County Commissioner in Sumter County,
Georgia who was convicted by a jury on one count of attempted extortion and one
count of federal program bribery. He appeals the district court’s denial of his
motion for judgment of acquittal and motion for new trial, raising the following
issues:
1. Did the district court err by denying his motion for judgment of acquittal
because the evidence was insufficient to prove that he was acting under
color of official right, that his conduct had a potential to affect interstate
commerce, and that he intended to be influenced as a County Commissioner
when he solicited and agreed to accept multiple bribe payments; and
2. Did the district court err when it denied Hurley’s motion for new trial and
rejected his claim that the evidence established at trial materially varied from
the allegations contained in the Indictment?
After de novo review and consideration of the briefs and the record, and having
the benefit of oral argument, we find no error in the proceedings in the district
court, and we affirm substantially for the reasons set forth in the district court’s
May 29, 2013 Order.
AFFIRMED.
Case: 13-13011 Date Filed: 10/20/2014 Page: 2 of 2
-- 2 of 2 --
Verbinden Sie Omnilex, um den Rechtskorpus über Ihren KI-Assistenten zu durchsuchen.