Opinion ID: 583595
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: The Two Indictments.

Text: 6 The Persico indictment charged Persico, Langella, and twelve other defendants with participating and conspiring to participate in the affairs of an enterprise often known as the Colombo Organized Crime Family of La Cosa Nostra through a pattern of racketeering activity in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1962(c) and (d) (1988). The alleged pattern, insofar as it involved participation by Persico and Langella, consisted of a Hobbs Act conspiracy to extort money from certain New York City construction companies engaged in the concrete-pouring business, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1951 (1988) (Persico and Langella); extortion of ten named construction companies in violation of § 1951 (Langella); receipt of illegal payoffs from the same ten construction companies in violation of 29 U.S.C. § 186(b)(1) (1988) (Langella); embezzlement of union funds in violation of 29 U.S.C. § 501(c) (1988) (Langella); various acts of bribery of public officials in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 201(b)(1) & (3) and (c)(1)(A) (1988) (Persico and Langella); loansharking and loansharking conspiracy in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 891-892 and 894 (1988) (Langella); and conduct of an illegal gambling business in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1955 (1988) and N.Y.Penal Law §§ 225.00 to .20 (McKinney 1989) (Langella). These counts also charged Langella with participation and conspiracy to participate in the affairs of the named enterprise through collection of unlawful debt in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1962(c) and (d) (1988). 7 In addition, the Persico indictment alleged parallel counts of conspiracy to extort and bribery of a public official against both Persico and Langella, and of extortion, receipt of illegal payoffs, loansharking and loansharking conspiracy, and conduct of an illegal gambling business against Langella. 8 The Commission indictment charged Persico, Langella, and seven other defendants with conspiring to participate and participating in the affairs of an enterprise often described as the 'Commission' of La Cosa Nostra through a pattern of racketeering activity, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1962(c) and (d) (1988). Persico, Langella, and Ralph Scopo were the only defendants named in both indictments. 1 The indictment alleged that the Commission was a council of leaders of various organized crime families, distinct from these families, established to resolve interfamily disputes and regulat[e] among the several La Cosa Nostra Families regarding the operation, conduct, and control of illegal activities, and to carry out joint ventures between families. 9 The Commission indictment primarily charged crimes relating to an extortionate conspiracy that controlled the allocation of contracts to pour concrete on construction jobs where concrete costs exceeded two million dollars. The contracts were allocated to a group of construction companies engaged in that activity and known as the Club. The alleged pattern of racketeering activity, insofar as it involved participation by Persico and Langella, consisted of a Hobbs Act conspiracy to extort money from Club members in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1951 (1988), and fifteen separate extortions and attempted extortions in violation of § 1951. 10 The indictment further charged Persico and Langella with a parallel count of conspiracy to extort in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1951 (1988); fifteen parallel counts of extortion and attempted extortion in violation of § 1951; and six corresponding counts of receiving illegal payoffs in violation of 29 U.S.C. § 186(b)(1) (1988). 11 The government furnished a bill of particulars in the Persico case that further specified the objectives and victims of the extortionate scheme. The bill of particulars stated that the conspiracy charged in the Persico indictment was confined to extorting payoffs in connection with construction jobs in which the portion of the contract price relating to the pouring of concrete did not exceed $2 million, and that the extorted proceeds were intended solely for the benefit of [the indicted defendants] and other members and associates of the Colombo Family. The bill of particulars also stated that the extortion payments were not divided or intended to be divided among other New York Families of La Cosa Nostra or among the 'Commission' of La Cosa Nostra, and that the jobs involved in the Persico extortionate scheme were not jobs that were allocated pursuant to an arrangement involving certain concrete contractors known as the 'Club.'  12 Before the Persico trial began, Persico, Langella, and Scopo moved to sever the racketeering act and related count that charged a conspiracy to extort from the Persico indictment and join them for trial with the indictment in the Commission case. After reviewing both indictments, the district court denied the motion, ruling that the indictments charged two separate extortionate schemes. See United States v. Persico, 621 F.Supp. 842, 855-56 (S.D.N.Y.1985). 13