Sue Hartigan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Supreme Court To Study Carjack Law > WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Supreme Court today agreed to > decide whether Congress left a gaping loophole in a > federal carjacking law. The court will hear the > argument of a New York man who says he never intended > to seriously hurt the people whose cars he stole at > gunpoint. > > The justices said they will review Francois Holloway's > arguments that lower courts misread a federal > anti-carjacking law by concluding it covers crimes > committed with ``conditional intent'' to harm victims > who refuse to comply with the robber's demands. > > Holloway was convicted and sentenced to over 50 years > in prison for his part in a carjacking ring that sold > parts from stolen vehicles dismantled in a Queens shop. > > In other cases the court: > > -- Said it will tackle a big-stakes dispute over > pension funds, setting the stage for a decision that > could affect the 33 million American workers and > retirees who participate in defined-benefit plans. The > justices will review a ruling that allowed five retired > Hughes Aircraft Co., employees to pursue a 1992 lawsuit > over what they say was a $1.2 billion surplus in the > company's contributory pension plan. > > -- Agreed to use a California case to decide whether > some local governments can avoid the need for federal > approval to change their election systems by getting > them ratified through state law. > > --Rejected Rockwell International Corp.'s attempt to > get out from under any further federal liability for > its past operation of the Rocky Flats nuclear weapons > plant near Denver. > > --Let stand rulings that require the federal government > to repay New York Life Insurance Co. nearly $32 million > -- taxes and interest the Internal Revenue Service said > the insurance firm owed for 1984. > > --Rejected a challenge to a Minnesota school district's > operation of a rural school rented from a religious > sect and attended only by children of the sect's > members. > > -- Let stand a $71.8 million antitrust award against > Eastman Kodak Co. won by competitors who repair Kodak > equipment. > > In the carjacking case, prosecutors said Holloway, on > several occasions in the fall of 1994, confronted > motorists with a gun and demanded that they surrender > their car keys. When one man hesitated, Holloway > punched him in the face. > > The federal law makes it a crime to take a motor > vehicle by force ``with the intent to cause death or > serious bodily harm.'' > > The federal judge who presided over Holloway's trial > told jurors they could find such intent if they thought > Holloway would have seriously hurt victims who did not > comply with his demands. The jury then convicted him. > > The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld Holloway's > conviction, ruling that such a common-sense > interpretation was valid despite the law's somewhat > ambiguous language. > > In the appeal acted on today, Holloway argued that the > appeals court's ruling violated ``fundamental > principles of statutory construction'' and his > due-process rights. > > The Supreme Court turned away two similar challenges > last year, but had asked Justice Department lawyers to > file a brief in response to Holloway's arguments. That > brief urged rejection of his appeal. > > The justices today did not follow the government's > advice. The court's decision in Holloway's case is > expected sometime in 1999. > > The case is Holloway vs. U.S., 97-7164. -- Two rules in life: 1. Don't tell people everything you know. 2. Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
