United States v. Turkette case brief

 United States v. Turkette

1. 1. Facts: The D was indicted under §1962(d) for conspiracy to engage in the narcotics traffic, bribery, and mail fraud… he was the leader of a criminal enterprise engaged in such acts
   2. Issue: Whether the term “enterprise” as used in RICO encompasses both legitimate and illegitimate enterprises or is limited to the former.
   3. Holding: The SC holds that the clear language of the statute does not seem to limit the “union or group of individuals” to merely those that are organized for a legitimate purpose; the purpose of RICO was to combat the invasion of organized crime into legitimate business, so it seems appropriate to apply RICO to the source of the problem (organized crime); finally the court says that although it may expand the jurisdiction of the federal courts (since many of the crimes that fall under the RICO umbrella are traditionally state crimes), this court holds that Congress was fully aware of that when they drafted RICO, and they did not act outside of the scope of their power.
   4. Impact of this decision: RICO is not restricted to infiltration of legitimate businesses by criminal elements
      1. An informal criminal association could be an enterprise in a prosecution under the statute
      2. Thus two forms of “enterprise” are covered by the statute
      3. The court interpreted “enterprise” to be separate from “pattern of racketeering activity,” therefore proof of one does not necessarily establish the other.
   5. It seems strange that criminal conspiracy maximum penalty is 5 years, however the RICO statute has a conspiracy maximum of 20 years.
   6. The SC elaborated on the elements of an informal criminal association: (1) “a group of persons associated together for a common purpose of engaging in a course of conduct,” and (2) an “ongoing organization, formal or informal, in which the various associates function as a continuing unit.”