# United States v. Dozier

> District Court, M.D. Louisiana · July 30, 1980 · 493 F. Supp. 554

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/1557883

## Case

- **Full name:** UNITED STATES of America v. Gilbert L. DOZIER
- **Court:** District Court, M.D. Louisiana
- **Decided:** July 30, 1980
- **Citations:** 493 F. Supp. 554; 1980 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14214
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Opinion by Polozola
- **Judges:** Polozola
- **Cited by:** 3 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/1557883

## Opinion text

POLOZOLA, District Judge.
The defendant, Gilbert L. Dozier, has filed a motion to dismiss Count I of the indictment on the grounds that the Department of Agriculture is not an “enterprise” as defined in the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO), 18 U.S.C. § 1961 , et seq. No oral argument is required on this motion.
The Court finds that the Louisiana Department of Agriculture is an enterprise within the meaning of 18 U.S.C. § 1961 (4). Therefore, defendant’s motion to dismiss Count I of the indictment must be denied.
United States v. Bright,
78-5472 (5 Cir. July 11, 1980);
United States v. Brown,
555 F.2d 407 (5 Cir.1977), certiorari denied 435 U.S. 904 , 98 S.Ct. 1448 , 55 L.Ed.2d 494 (1978);
United States v. Baker,
617 F.2d 1060 (4 Cir.1980);
United States v. Grzywacz,
603 F.2d 682 (7 Cir.1979);
United States v. Frumento,
563 F.2d 1083 (3 Cir. 1977);
United States v. Bacheler,
611 F.2d 443 (3 Cir.1979);
United States v. Vignola,
464 F.Supp. 1091 (E.D.Pa.1979), aff. mem., 605 F.2d 1199 (3 Cir.1979);
United States v. Altomare,
625 F.2d 5 (4. Cir. July 17, 1980);
United States v. Barber,
476 F.Supp. 182 (S.D.W.Va.1979).
Therefore:
IT IS ORDERED that defendant’s motion to dismiss Count I of'the indictment be and it is hereby DENIED.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/1557883. Public record. Not legal advice.