United States v. Rodriguez
United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
803 F.2d 318 (1986)
- Written by Tanya Munson, JD
Facts
Jose Rodriguez (defendant) was a member of Fuerzas Armadas de Liberación Nacional (FALN), an armed clandestine terrorist group that sought independence for Puerto Rico. FALN had caused terror and violence in the Chicago area, including planting explosives at various buildings. The United States government (plaintiff) planted hidden cameras and microphones at two FALN safe houses. The surveillance recorded a meeting in which Rodriguez discussed FALN activities such as breaking out incarcerated FALN members from prison, obtaining false identification, using code names, how to avoid law enforcement surveillance, and sharing funds amongst FALN groups. Within a month after the meeting, Rodriguez used the name, birthdate, and social security number of a disabled man to obtain a library card and subsequently a driver’s license. The government arrested Rodriguez and three others for conspiracy to bomb Marine and Army Reserve training centers. At trial, evidence showed that Rodriguez was a member of the conspiracy and that he intended to drive the coconspirators to the bombing sites. Rodriguez was convicted of seditious conspiracy under 18 U.S.C. § 2384. Rodriguez appealed on the grounds that § 2384 was unconstitutional and was merely constructive treason.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Bauer, C.J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 816,000 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.