RICO Jury Instructions: Conducting Affairs of Association-In-Fact Manual of Model Criminal Jury Instructions For The District Courts of The Ninth Circuit
0 penilaian0% menganggap dokumen ini bermanfaat (0 suara)
124 tayangan3 halaman
Racketeering Enterprise: Conducting the Affairs of Association-in-Fact. Manual of Model Criminal Jury Instruction for the District Courts of the Ninth Circuit, Instruction 8.161.
The defendant is charged in [Count _______ of] the indictment with having [conducted]
[participated in the conduct of] the affairs of an enterprise through a pattern of racketeering activity in violation of Section 1962(c) of Title 18 of the United States Code. In order for the defendant to be found guilty of that charge, the government must prove each of the following elements beyond a reasonable doubt:
First, there was an on-going enterprise with some sort of formal or informal framework for carrying out its objectives consisting of a group of persons associated together for a common purpose of engaging in a course of conduct;
Second, the defendant was employed by or associated with the enterprise;
Third, the defendant [conducted] [participated, directly or indirectly, in the conduct of] the affairs of the enterprise through a pattern of racketeering activity or collection of unlawful debt. To conduct or participate means that the defendant had to be involved in the operation or
management of the enterprise; and
Fourth, the enterprise engaged in or its activities in some way affected commerce between one state and [an]other state[s], or between the United States and a foreign country.
An enterprise need not be a formal entity such as a corporation and need not have a name, regular meetings, or established rules.
Judul Asli
RICO Jury Instructions: Conducting Affairs of Association-In-Fact Manual of Model Criminal Jury Instructions for the District Courts of the Ninth Circuit
Racketeering Enterprise: Conducting the Affairs of Association-in-Fact. Manual of Model Criminal Jury Instruction for the District Courts of the Ninth Circuit, Instruction 8.161.
The defendant is charged in [Count _______ of] the indictment with having [conducted]
[participated in the conduct of] the affairs of an enterprise through a pattern of racketeering activity in violation of Section 1962(c) of Title 18 of the United States Code. In order for the defendant to be found guilty of that charge, the government must prove each of the following elements beyond a reasonable doubt:
First, there was an on-going enterprise with some sort of formal or informal framework for carrying out its objectives consisting of a group of persons associated together for a common purpose of engaging in a course of conduct;
Second, the defendant was employed by or associated with the enterprise;
Third, the defendant [conducted] [participated, directly or indirectly, in the conduct of] the affairs of the enterprise through a pattern of racketeering activity or collection of unlawful debt. To conduct or participate means that the defendant had to be involved in the operation or
management of the enterprise; and
Fourth, the enterprise engaged in or its activities in some way affected commerce between one state and [an]other state[s], or between the United States and a foreign country.
An enterprise need not be a formal entity such as a corporation and need not have a name, regular meetings, or established rules.
Hak Cipta:
Public Domain
Format Tersedia
Unduh sebagai PDF, TXT atau baca online dari Scribd
0 penilaian0% menganggap dokumen ini bermanfaat (0 suara)
124 tayangan3 halaman
RICO Jury Instructions: Conducting Affairs of Association-In-Fact Manual of Model Criminal Jury Instructions For The District Courts of The Ninth Circuit
Racketeering Enterprise: Conducting the Affairs of Association-in-Fact. Manual of Model Criminal Jury Instruction for the District Courts of the Ninth Circuit, Instruction 8.161.
The defendant is charged in [Count _______ of] the indictment with having [conducted]
[participated in the conduct of] the affairs of an enterprise through a pattern of racketeering activity in violation of Section 1962(c) of Title 18 of the United States Code. In order for the defendant to be found guilty of that charge, the government must prove each of the following elements beyond a reasonable doubt:
First, there was an on-going enterprise with some sort of formal or informal framework for carrying out its objectives consisting of a group of persons associated together for a common purpose of engaging in a course of conduct;
Second, the defendant was employed by or associated with the enterprise;
Third, the defendant [conducted] [participated, directly or indirectly, in the conduct of] the affairs of the enterprise through a pattern of racketeering activity or collection of unlawful debt. To conduct or participate means that the defendant had to be involved in the operation or
management of the enterprise; and
Fourth, the enterprise engaged in or its activities in some way affected commerce between one state and [an]other state[s], or between the United States and a foreign country.
An enterprise need not be a formal entity such as a corporation and need not have a name, regular meetings, or established rules.
Hak Cipta:
Public Domain
Format Tersedia
Unduh sebagai PDF, TXT atau baca online dari Scribd
ASSOCIATIONINFACT (18 U.S.C. 1962(c)) The defendant is charged in [Count _______ of] the indictment with having [conducted] [participated in the conduct of] the affairs of an enterprise through a pattern of racketeering activity in violation of Section 1962(c) of Title 18 of the United States Code. In order for the defendant to be found guilty of that charge, the government must prove each of the following elements beyond a reasonable doubt: First, there was an on-going enterprise with some sort of formal or informal framework for carrying out its objectives consisting of a group of persons associated together for a common purpose of engaging in a course of conduct; Second, the defendant was employed by or associated with the enterprise; Third, the defendant [conducted] [participated, directly or indirectly, in the conduct of] the affairs of the enterprise through a pattern of racketeering activity or collection of unlawful debt. To conduct or participate means that the defendant had to be involved in the operation or management of the enterprise; and Fourth, the enterprise engaged in or its activities in some way affected commerce between one state and [an]other state[s], or between the United States and a foreign country. An enterprise need not be a formal entity such as a corporation and need not have a name, regular meetings, or established rules. Comment When racketeering acts are charged as separate counts in the indictment, use this instruction in combination with Instructions 8.155 (RICORacketeering ActCharged as Separate Count in Indictment) and 8.157 (RICOPattern of Racketeering Activity). When the racketeering acts are not charged as separate counts in the indictment, use this instruction in combination with Instructions 8.156 (RICORacketeering ActNot Charged as Separate Count in the Indictment) and 8.157 (RICOPattern of Racketeering Activity). RICO requires that an association-in-fact enterprise must have a structure, but the word structure need not be used in the jury instruction. Boyle v. United States, ___ U.S. ___, 129 S. Ct. 2237, 2244 (2009). The definition of enterprise in the first element of the instruction is based on Boyle, 129 S. Ct. at 2243, and United States v. Turkette, 452 U.S. 576, 583 (1981). For RICO purposes, an association in fact need not have a name, regular meetings, dues, established rules and regulations, disciplinary procedures, or induction or initiation ceremonies. Boyle, 129 S. Ct. at 2246. 326
See United States v. Shryock, 342 F.3d 948, 985-86 (9th Cir.2003) (defining conducts or participates in the affairs of the enterprise).
Motion to Dismiss for Loss or Destruction of Evidence (Trombetta) Filed July 5, 2018 by Defendant Susan Bassi: People v. Bassi - Santa Clara County District Attorney Jeff Rosen, Deputy District Attorney Alison Filo - Defense Attorney Dmitry Stadlin - Judge John Garibaldi - Santa Clara County Superior Court Presiding Judge Patricia Lucas - Silicon Valley California -
California Judicial Branch News Service - Investigative Reporting Source Material & Story Ideas
Opposition to Murgia Motion to Compel Discovery Filed August 9, 2018 by Plaintiff People of the State of California: People v. Bassi - Santa Clara County District Attorney Jeff Rosen, Deputy District Attorney Alison Filo - Defense Attorney Dmitry Stadlin - Judge John Garibaldi - Santa Clara County Superior Court Presiding Judge Patricia Lucas - Silicon Valley California -
California Judicial Branch News Service - Investigative Reporting Source Material & Story Ideas
Opposition to Motion to Dismiss (Trumbetta) Filed August 9, 2018 by Plaintiff People of the State of California:: People v. Bassi - Santa Clara County District Attorney Jeff Rosen, Deputy District Attorney Alison Filo - Defense Attorney Dmitry Stadlin - Judge John Garibaldi - Santa Clara County Superior Court Presiding Judge Patricia Lucas - Silicon Valley California -
California Judicial Branch News Service - Investigative Reporting Source Material & Story Ideas
Federal Criminal Indictment - US v. Judge Joseph Boeckmann - Wire Fraud, Honest Services Fraud, Travel Act, Witness Tampering - US District Court Eastern District of Arkansas
California Judicial Branch News Service - Investigative Reporting Source Material & Story Ideas
Judge Bruce Mills Misconduct: Alteration of Court Record - Fletcher v. Commission on Judicial Performance - Alteration of Minute Order/Court Record - with - Contra Costa County District Attorney Criminal Complaint Against Hon. Bruce C. Mills in Evilsizor v. Sweeney Case Contra Costa County Superior Court - with - 2016 Judge Bruce Mills Misconduct Catalog 2001 - 2013
California Judicial Branch News Service - Investigative Reporting Source Material & Story Ideas
Motion to Augment and Correct the Record on Appeal by Attorney James Brosnahan: Susan Ferris v. David Ferris - Appeal Alleging Legal Error and Misconduct by Sacramento Superior Court Judge Matthew Gary - Appeal Subsequently Dismissed by 3rd District Court of Appeal Justice Cole Blease
California Judicial Branch News Service - Investigative Reporting Source Material & Story Ideas
Judge Bruce C. Mills Serial Misconduct Catalog: Prosecutions by California Commission on Judicial Performance - Hon. Bruce Clayton Mills Contra Costa County Superior Court Code of Judicial Ethics Violations Compilation
California Judicial Branch News Service - Investigative Reporting Source Material & Story Ideas
Motion To Exclude Evidence of Audrie Pott's Biological Father: Opposition To Plaintiff's Motion In Limine No. 1 Seeking To Preclude Evidence of Lawrence Pott's Parentage - Audrie & Daisy Netflix Documentary - Sheila Pott - Larry Pott - Lisa Pott - Santa Clara County Superior Court Sheila Pott and Lawrence Pott v. John B. - Judge Brian Walsh Santa Clara County
California Judicial Branch News Service - Investigative Reporting Source Material & Story Ideas