Leonard Ray Blanton and Betty Blanton - Page 4

                                                - 4 -                                                   
                  Petitioner herein was the defendant in the criminal case of                           
            United States of America v. Leonard Ray Blanton, et al., Crim.                              
            No. 80-30253 (M.D. Tenn., 1981), which was docketed in the U.S.                             
            District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee.  In March                              
            1981, a Federal grand jury in the Middle District of Tennessee                              
            returned an 11-count4 indictment against petitioner, his                                    
            assistant, Clyde Edward Hood, Jr., and a third defendant for                                
            conspiracy, mail fraud, and violation of the Hobbs Act, 18 U.S.C.                           
            sec. 1951 (1976).5  Petitioner was found guilty on all 11 counts                            
            and was sentenced to a concurrent 3-year prison term and fined                              
                  Thereafter, the Supreme Court decided McNally v. United                               
            States, 483 U.S. 350 (1987), wherein it held that mail fraud                                
            prohibits only schemes intended to deprive victims of property                              
            such as money and not schemes intended to deprive victims of                                
            intangible rights such as the right to honest Government.  Based                            

            4     The grand jury originally returned a 13-count indictment                              
            against petitioner.  The last two counts, which charged                                     
            petitioner alone with income tax evasion and filing a false tax                             
            return, were severed from the other 11 counts and were                                      
            subsequently dismissed.  See Blanton I, supra at 492.                                       
            5     More specifically, petitioner was indicted for unlawfully,                            
            willfully, and knowingly obstructing, delaying, and affecting                               
            interstate commerce by extorting $23,334.50 from Jack Ham (Ham),                            
            a constituent, representing 20 percent of the profits of a retail                           
            liquor store which Ham agreed to pay petitioner in return for                               
            petitioner's assistance in procuring the liquor license.                                    
            6     For a complete discussion of this issue see Blanton I.                                

Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011