Event Details

January 01, 2004

Description

The case of Leocal v. Ashcroft, which stated that language like “offense that . . . involves” requires looking at the elements of the offense.

Participants (2)

Name Type Mentions
Leocal person 12 View Entity
Ashcroft person 27 View Entity

Source Documents (1)

DOJ-OGR-00002667.jpg

Legal document • 705 KB
View

This document is a page from a legal filing, dated February 4, 2021, which argues for a specific interpretation of the statutory phrase "offense involving." It cites several court precedents, including cases like Kawashima v. Holder and United States v. Morgan, to support the position that this phrase requires looking at the essential elements of the crime itself, not merely the surrounding circumstances. The D.C. Circuit's analysis of a venue statute is used as a key example to illustrate that for an offense to 'involve' an activity like interstate transportation, that activity must be a formal element of the offense.

Related Events

Events with shared participants

Citation to Leocal v. Ashcroft, which also concerned a statute with language invoking an elements-based approach.

2004-01-01

View

The case of Leocal v. Ashcroft was decided, interpreting 18 U.S.C. § 16(b).

2004-01-01 • United States

View

Event Metadata

Type
legal case
Location
Unknown
Significance Score
5/10
Participants
2
Source Documents
1
Extracted
2025-11-20 15:36

Additional Data

Source
DOJ-OGR-00002667.jpg
Date String
2004

Discussion 0

Sign in to join the discussion

No comments yet

Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein event