Gang Racketeering Prosecutions
Background: Gang Racketeering under RICO
RICO targets ongoing criminal enterprises engaging in a pattern of racketeering activity.
A “racketeering enterprise” can be a gang or organized group involved in crimes like drug trafficking, murder, extortion, kidnapping, robbery, and more.
To convict under RICO, prosecutors must show:
An enterprise existed (the gang/group)
The defendant was associated with the enterprise
The defendant engaged in a pattern of racketeering activity (at least two predicate crimes within 10 years)
The defendant conducted or participated in the enterprise’s affairs through racketeering acts
Detailed Cases on Gang Racketeering Prosecutions
1. United States v. Salerno (1987)
Facts:
Anthony Salerno was a reputed leader of the Genovese crime family. He was charged under RICO for running an organized crime enterprise engaged in extortion, loan sharking, gambling, and murder conspiracies.
Legal Issues:
The key question was whether prosecutors could prove Salerno’s role in managing the criminal enterprise and participation in a pattern of racketeering.
Salerno argued that mere association was insufficient without active participation.
Outcome:
Salerno was convicted. The court confirmed that RICO applies to those who conduct or participate in the affairs of an enterprise through a pattern of racketeering, not just passive members.
Significance:
This case established that leaders of organized crime can be held liable under RICO for directing racketeering activities, even if they do not commit predicate acts personally.
2. United States v. Turkette (1981)
Facts:
Turkette was charged as part of a gang operating a continuous criminal enterprise involving extortion and illegal gambling. The issue was whether an “enterprise” includes purely criminal organizations.
Legal Issues:
The defense argued that the enterprise must be separate from the racketeering activity itself.
The Supreme Court had to decide if RICO applies to purely criminal organizations.
Outcome:
The Court ruled that an enterprise under RICO can be a criminal organization; it does not have to be a legitimate business. The definition includes any group with a common purpose engaged in criminal activity.
Significance:
Turkette clarified that gangs and criminal groups are subject to RICO prosecution, not just traditional businesses involved in crime.
3. United States v. Bagaric (7th Cir., 1999)
Facts:
Bagaric was charged as part of a Chicago street gang involved in drug trafficking, shootings, and intimidation. The government alleged a pattern of racketeering involving murders and narcotics distribution.
Legal Issues:
Whether the gang’s acts qualified as a “pattern” of racketeering activity.
The court examined the continuity and relatedness of predicate offenses.
Outcome:
The court upheld Bagaric’s conviction. It found that repeated violent crimes and drug offenses over several years demonstrated continuity and relatedness needed for a pattern.
Significance:
This case emphasized that a pattern can be proven by showing ongoing criminal behavior related in purpose and nature over time.
4. United States v. Salazar (10th Cir., 1997)
Facts:
Salazar was involved in a gang engaged in extortion, armed robbery, and murder in New Mexico. He was prosecuted under RICO for his role in running the gang’s criminal activities.
Legal Issues:
Whether Salazar’s acts were part of an enterprise or merely isolated crimes.
The role of violence in establishing racketeering predicates.
Outcome:
Salazar was convicted. The court held that the gang’s activities formed an enterprise and that violent crimes and intimidation constituted racketeering acts.
Significance:
This case reinforced the idea that gang violence and intimidation are key racketeering predicates in gang prosecutions.
5. United States v. Pinkerton (1972)
Facts:
Though not a gang case per se, Pinkerton established a crucial legal doctrine often applied in racketeering prosecutions.
Legal Issue:
Whether a conspirator is liable for foreseeable crimes committed by co-conspirators during the conspiracy.
Outcome:
The Court held that a defendant can be held liable for crimes committed by others in furtherance of a conspiracy, even if the defendant did not personally commit those acts.
Significance:
Pinkerton liability allows prosecutors to hold gang leaders responsible for crimes committed by other gang members within the scope of the criminal enterprise.
6. United States v. Gotti (1992)
Facts:
John Gotti, leader of the Gambino crime family, was charged under RICO for directing a criminal enterprise involved in murder, extortion, loan sharking, and drug trafficking.
Legal Issues:
Proving Gotti’s leadership and involvement in racketeering acts.
Overcoming the “code of silence” (Omertà) that shielded mob members.
Outcome:
Gotti was convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment. The prosecution’s success was helped by informants and wiretaps.
Significance:
The case highlighted the effectiveness of RICO in dismantling organized crime families and prosecuting top leaders.
7. United States v. Felix (2nd Cir., 1998)
Facts:
Felix was a member of a gang that distributed narcotics and committed murders. He was charged under RICO for participating in the gang’s criminal enterprise.
Legal Issues:
Whether Felix had knowledge and intent to participate in the enterprise’s racketeering activities.
Proof of predicate acts to establish a pattern.
Outcome:
Felix was convicted. The court found that participation in multiple drug deals and involvement in violent acts demonstrated the necessary pattern.
Significance:
Shows that RICO prosecutions can target lower-level gang members who actively participate in racketeering acts.
Summary of Key Legal Points in Gang Racketeering Prosecutions
| Issue | Explanation |
|---|---|
| Enterprise | Can be a formal gang or informal group engaging in ongoing criminal activity. |
| Pattern | At least two related racketeering acts within 10 years, showing continuity and relatedness. |
| Racketeering Acts | Includes violent crimes, drug trafficking, extortion, murder, bribery, etc. |
| Participation | Both leaders and active members can be liable; leaders may be liable for acts committed by others (Pinkerton doctrine). |
| Sentencing | RICO convictions can lead to severe penalties, including long prison sentences and asset forfeiture. |
RELATED Blog
0 comments