BOYLE V. UNITED STATES
556 U.S. 938 (2009)
NATURE OF THE CASE: Boyle (D) appealed an affirmation of a conviction under RICO.
FACTS: D and others participated in a series of bank thefts in New York, New Jersey, Ohio, and Wisconsin during the 1990's. The participants included a core group, along with others who were recruited from time to time. The group usually targeted cash-laden night-deposit boxes. A group of participants would met beforehand to plan the crime, gather tools and assign the roles that each participant would play. They generally split the proceeds from the thefts. The group was loosely and informally organized. It does not appear to have had a leader or hierarchy; nor does it appear that the participants ever formulated any long-term master plan or agreement. From 1991 to 1994, the core group was responsible for more than 30 night-deposit-box thefts. By 1994, D had joined the group, and over the next five years, he participated in numerous attempted night-deposit-box thefts and at least two attempted bank-vault burglaries. D was eventually caught and tried under RICO. The court instructed the jurors that, in order to establish the existence of such an enterprise, the Government had to prove that: '(1) There [was] an ongoing organization with some sort of framework, formal or informal, for carrying out its objectives; and (2) the various members and associates of the association function[ed] as a continuing unit to achieve a common purpose.' The court also told the jury that it could 'find an enterprise where an association of individuals, without structural hierarchy, form[ed] solely for the purpose of carrying out a pattern of racketeering acts' and that '[c]ommon sense suggests that the existence of an association-in-fact is oftentimes more readily proven by what it does, rather than by abstract analysis of its structure.' D was denied the following instruction: The Government was required to prove that the enterprise 'had an ongoing organization, a core membership that functioned as a continuing unit, and an ascertainable structural hierarchy distinct from the charged predicate acts.' P was convicted and appealed. The Second Circuit affirmed. The Supreme Court granted review on the RICO issue.
ISSUE:
RULE OF LAW:
HOLDING AND
DECISION:
LEGAL ANALYSIS:
Get
free access to the entire content for Mac, PC or Online
for 2-3 days and free samples
of all kinds of products.
https://bsmsphd.com
No comments:
Post a Comment