Racketeer Influenced And Corrupt Organizations Act Prosecutions
📌 What is RICO?
The Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO), enacted in 1970, is a powerful federal law designed to combat organized crime. It allows prosecution of individuals or groups who commit a pattern of racketeering activity connected to an “enterprise.” The law targets ongoing criminal organizations rather than isolated crimes.
⚖️ Key Elements of a RICO Prosecution
To secure a conviction under RICO, the prosecution must prove:
Existence of an “Enterprise” — A group with a common purpose, which can be a formal organization or informal association.
Conduct of the Enterprise’s Affairs — The defendant participated in the operation or management.
Pattern of Racketeering Activity — At least two acts of racketeering (predicate offenses) within 10 years.
Connection Between Racketeering Acts and Enterprise — The acts must relate to the enterprise’s operation.
Predicate offenses include fraud, bribery, extortion, murder, drug trafficking, and many others.
⚖️ Important RICO Case Law
1. Sedima, S.P.R.L. v. Imrex Co., 473 U.S. 479 (1985)
Facts:
Sedima alleged Imrex engaged in a fraudulent scheme involving a union pension fund and sought damages under RICO.
Legal Issue:
What constitutes a “pattern of racketeering activity”?
Ruling:
The Supreme Court held that a pattern requires at least two predicate acts, but those acts need not be related to each other or have the same purpose.
Importance:
Clarified that a “pattern” is broader than just related acts; two or more predicate offenses suffice.
Emphasized Congress’s intent to allow civil RICO suits broadly.
2. United States v. Turkette, 452 U.S. 576 (1981)
Facts:
Turkette was part of an organized crime group involved in drug trafficking and extortion.
Legal Issue:
Does the “enterprise” requirement apply only to formal organizations?
Ruling:
No. The Court held that an enterprise can be either formal or informal — an association-in-fact.
Importance:
Expanded the definition of “enterprise” to include informal groups.
Enabled prosecution of loosely connected criminal conspiracies under RICO.
3. Reves v. Ernst & Young, 507 U.S. 170 (1993)
Facts:
Reves sued Ernst & Young alleging they participated in a fraud scheme tied to a RICO enterprise.
Legal Issue:
What level of participation is required for liability under RICO?
Ruling:
The Court ruled that a defendant must have conducted or participated in the conduct of the enterprise’s affairs—mere knowledge or aid is insufficient.
Importance:
Introduced the “operation or management” test for liability.
Defendants must have some control or decision-making role in the enterprise.
4. H.J. Inc. v. Northwestern Bell Telephone Co., 492 U.S. 229 (1989)
Facts:
Plaintiff alleged a pattern of fraudulent and extortionate acts by a telephone company.
Legal Issue:
What level of relatedness and continuity is required for a racketeering pattern?
Ruling:
The Court clarified the requirement of “relatedness” and “continuity” in racketeering acts: predicate acts must be related and either continuous over a substantial period or pose a threat of ongoing criminal activity.
Importance:
Helped define what qualifies as a “pattern.”
Prevented misuse of RICO for isolated criminal acts.
5. Boyle v. United States, 556 U.S. 938 (2009)
Facts:
Boyle was charged with participating in an organized crime group involved in violent crimes.
Legal Issue:
How can an association-in-fact enterprise be proven?
Ruling:
The Court held that an enterprise can be proven by showing a common purpose, relationships among members, and longevity sufficient to pursue the enterprise’s goals.
Importance:
Provided a flexible framework for proving the existence of an enterprise.
Focused on functional relationships rather than formal structures.
6. United States v. Gotti, 459 F.3d 296 (2d Cir. 2006)
Facts:
John Gotti, head of the Gambino crime family, was prosecuted under RICO for murder, extortion, and racketeering.
Legal Issue:
Application of RICO to organized crime families.
Ruling:
Convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment.
Importance:
Classic example of RICO used to dismantle Mafia organizations.
Showed RICO’s strength in prosecuting leaders through their criminal enterprises.
🧾 Summary of Legal Principles from the Cases
| Legal Principle | Key Case | Explanation |
|---|---|---|
| Two predicate acts suffice for a pattern | Sedima v. Imrex | Pattern requires at least two predicate acts; they need not be related. |
| Enterprise can be informal association | Turkette | Enterprise includes informal groups or associations-in-fact. |
| Liability requires operation/management | Reves v. Ernst & Young | Defendant must conduct or participate in management of the enterprise. |
| Pattern requires relatedness and continuity | H.J. Inc. v. Northwestern Bell | Predicate acts must be related and continuous or pose ongoing threat. |
| Enterprise proven by common purpose and longevity | Boyle v. U.S. | Functional relationships suffice to prove enterprise existence. |
| RICO effective in prosecuting organized crime leaders | U.S. v. Gotti | Used to hold leaders accountable for enterprise crimes. |
🧩 Conclusion
RICO prosecutions are powerful tools for dismantling criminal organizations by targeting not just individuals but the entire enterprise. Courts have clarified that:
A “pattern” requires at least two related predicate offenses.
Enterprises can be informal groups, not just formal organizations.
Defendants must have some role in managing or operating the enterprise.
The statute can be applied in both criminal and civil cases.
RICO has been successfully used against organized crime, white-collar criminals, corrupt officials, and more.
RELATED Blog
0 comments