United States v. Robert Richard Oxendine

Defendant was convicted on two counts of interstate communication of threats in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 875 (c). The threats were directed at one Smith, a Federal Communications Commission inspector. We hold that prosecutions under 18 U.S.C. § 875 (c) do require proof of a transmission in interstate commerce.

The only problem before the court is whether there was evidence from which a jury might find that the threats had in fact been transmitted across the Nevada state line into either Arizona or California. The defendant owned a transmitter with a measured output of three watts which was capable of sending messages 20 to 25 miles. The Arizona and California borders are 35 and 45 miles respectively distant from Las Vegas, the point of transmission.

On April 20, 1975, at about 2:45 P.M., defendant was heard talking to the “California kid” located in what the Government witnesses assumed to be the Lake Mead area. Some parts of Lake Mead are in Arizona and some parts of it are in Nevada. Somewhat later on April 20th, but before 7:10 P.M., there were transmissions recorded between defendant and some unidentified person as follows:

And, following a break, the…