|
Summary
The unity of the RICO statutes is that such permits
the building of a criminal or civil case regarding events that do not prima facie appear to be part of a larger organization.
The statutes give considerable leverage to the United States Attorney General to coordinate resources to direct the fragmentation,
prosecution, and divestment of the enterprise. There are opinions that the basic constitutional rights of the average citizen
have been abridged by returning power to the Department of Justice from the citizen. This critique is beyond the scope of
this brief.
In points of criminal law, the authors of RICO crafted
such that the United
States could not directly proscribe the status of being a member of a criminal organization.
Alternatively, crimes in which organized crime groups typically are supposed to engage were cited, and then RICO made participation
in a group that commits such crimes. RICO, in this respect, is similar to conspiracy, which technically is defined in terms
of an act; the act of agreeing to commit a crime, but which the courts treat as an enterprise.
An enterprise may be only one principal.
RICO has been used to greatest success,
to prosecute those who commit crimes as part of a group. It goes beyond conspiracy, in that it permits the joinder of members
of a group who are too loosely connected with each other to be considered parties to a single conspiratorial agreement. RICO
permits the prosecution to bring to trial all members of the group, to expose the full scope of the organization, to "present
a complete picture of a large-scale, ongoing, organized-crime group engaged in diverse rackets and episodic explosions of
violence." (Wise, 2000).
Agreement of a conspirator with other principals
is not needed for successful prosecutions, Delano, 825 F. Supp. at 542.
All that must be shown is: (1) that the defendant agreed to commit the substantive racketeering offense through agreeing to
participate in two predicate acts; (2) the principal had knowledge of the general status of the conspiracy; and (3) that one
knew the conspiracy extended beyond ones individual role. United States v. Rastelli, 870 F. 2d 822, 828 (2d Cir.),
cert. denied, 493 U.S. 982, 110 S. Ct. 515, 107 L.
Ed. 2d 516 (1989).
RICO has been used to greatest success, to prosecute
those who commit crimes as part of a group. It goes beyond conspiracy, in that it permits the joinder of members of a group
who are too loosely connected with each other to be considered parties to a single conspiratorial agreement. RICO permits
the prosecution to bring to trial all members of the group, to expose the full scope of the organization, to "present a complete
picture of a large-scale, ongoing, organized-crime group engaged in diverse rackets and episodic explosions of violence."
(Wise, 2000).
Agreement of a conspirator with other principals
is not needed for successful prosecutions, Delano, 825 F. Supp. at 542.
All that must be shown is: (1) that the defendant agreed to commit the substantive racketeering offense through agreeing to
participate in two predicate acts; (2) the principal had knowledge of the general status of the conspiracy; and (3) that one
knew the conspiracy extended beyond ones individual role. United States v. Rastelli, 870 F. 2d 822, 828 (2d Cir.),
cert. denied, 493 U.S. 982, 110 S. Ct. 515, 107 L.
Ed. 2d 516 (1989).
Conclusion
According to Carlson, K & Finn, P.1993:
In 1990, 3,248 defendants in cases terminated in
United States District Courts were charged with either racketeering or one or more of the offenses underlying the racketeering
statute. Thirty-one percent of these defendants, 996 were specifically charged
with a racketeering violation. Over a 3-year period ending June 30, 1990,
racketeering convictions were based principally on charges of interstate travel in aid of racketeering (28%) or RICO (27%). The predicate offenses on which racketeering convictions were based were primarily
gambling offenses (21%), drug offenses (23%), and threats and extortion (22%).
The average monetary loss in such cases involving racketeering was 1.9 million dollars. Prosecutions on racketeering
charges were more likely in the eastern United States than
in the west. A quarter (27%) of defendants in racketeering cases terminated in 1990 were prosecuted in five judicial districts
(Northern Illinois, Southern Florida, Southern and Eastern New York,
and South Carolina) (Carlson, K. & Finn, P. 1993).
Criminal and civil complaints are growing increasingly novel. The range in subject matter can be from abortion
protests, divorce settlements, securities, towards abuse by clergy. The code does not specify in the abstract more than the
generic term felony. The Courts have been used extensively in the law of case to narrow the various types of pleadings that
can be heard under the RICO statutes. Many of the cases are recent opinions. In addition to official government
sources, the Rico Law Reporter is a very professional publisher of legal consultation
that endeavors to cover all RICO filings and dispositions.
|