United States v. James
United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
528 F.2d 999 (1976)
- Written by Craig Conway, LLM
Facts
Wayne Maurice James and six other individuals (defendants) were members of the Republic of New Africa (RNA) located in Jackson, Mississippi. The RNA claimed to be an independent foreign nation composed of “citizens” that had descended from enslaved Africans in the United States. The members held regular meetings at a building called the “capitol” at which they spoke of inciting violence against the state and federal governments, law enforcement personnel, and others. A substantial part of the time members conducted military-type drills with weapons that were neatly stacked and accessible if the “capitol” were ever “invaded.” After a prolonged Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) undercover operation, it was learned that RNA members had plans to “wipe out the National Guard of Mississippi” and to set up a separate nation through the acquisition of five southern states. Federal and local law enforcement surrounded the “capitol” and a shootout erupted. One police officer was killed and two others were wounded. Defendants were charged with and convicted of (1) conspiracy to commit assault on federal officers engaged in the performance of their duties; (2) using firearms to commit the assault; and (3) possessing unregistered firearms. Defendants appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Brewster, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 805,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.