holding that predicate acts must be interrelated and pose threat of continuity to constitute racketeering pattern and that these components may be established in various ways, including by linking each predicate to enterprise whose business is racketeering
How later courts described this case
- holding that predicate acts must be interrelated and pose threat of continuity to constitute racketeering pattern and that these components may be established in various ways, including by linking each predicate to enterprise whose business is racketeering
- concluding that “nearly simultaneous murders of three persons as part of the conduct of the affairs of an organized crime enterprise constituted a ‘pattern of racketeering activity' within the meaning of [RICO]”
- noting that proof of racketeering acts and proof of enterprise in “establishment of a[n] [18 U.S.C. § 1962(c) ] violation will often entail overlap, for each act of racketeering activity will be related to the enterprise since the latter’s affairs are by hypothesis-conducted through a pattern of such acts”
- stating that an act in furtherance of a racketeering business “automatically carries with it the threat of continued racketeering activity”
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
MAHONEY, Circuit Judge
(concurring):
I am in general agreement with Judge Kearse’s excellent opinion, and write separately only to state my disagreement with its assertion that “the concepts of relatedness and continuity are attributes of activity, not of a RICO enterprise....,” a point reiterated in several variations in the majority opinion.
The Supreme Court stated in United States v. Turkette, 452 U.S. 576 , 101 S.Ct. 2524 , 69 L.Ed.2d 246 (1981), that:
The [enterprise] is proved by evidence of an ongoing organization, formal or informal, and by evidence that the associates function as a continuing unit.
Id. at 583 , 101 S.Ct. at 2528 (emphasis added). It would thus appear clear that continuity is an attribute of a RICO enterprise, as well as a RICO pattern. As to relatedness, there will presumably be a relationship (1) between the associates that function as a continuing unit, and (2) between the associates and the unit.
The majority’s essential point is that the discussion of relatedness and continuity in Sedima footnote 14 refers to the RICO pattern rather than the RICO enterprise. I agree, and think that is what we should say.