This site is a developmental version of Wiki Law School. To go to the production site: www.wikilawschool.org
Perez v. United States: Difference between revisions
From wikilawschool.net. Wiki Law School does not provide legal advice. For educational purposes only.
Lost Student (talk | contribs) m (Text replacement - "|case_text_source=Quimbee video summary" to "|source_type=Video summary |case_text_source=Quimbee") |
Lost Student (talk | contribs) m (Text replacement - "|case_treatment=No " to "") |
||
Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
|other_subjects=Commerce clause | |other_subjects=Commerce clause | ||
|appealed_from=New York Appellate Division | |appealed_from=New York Appellate Division | ||
|facts=Petitioner was convicted of "loansharking" activities. | |facts=Petitioner was convicted of "loansharking" activities. | ||
|procedural_history=Perez was the loan shark. | |procedural_history=Perez was the loan shark. |
Latest revision as of 03:41, July 14, 2023
Perez v. United States | |
Court | Supreme Court of the United States |
---|---|
Citation | |
Date decided | April 26, 1971 |
Appealed from | New York Appellate Division |
Facts
Petitioner was convicted of "loansharking" activities.
Procedural History
Perez was the loan shark.
A butcher shop owner named Miranda borrowed money from Perez.Arguments
Loansharks operate similar to organized crime which has a substantially adverse effect on interstate commerce.
Holding
Congress has the power to criminalize loan sharking.