Opinion ID: 763759
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: Evidence of Morales' Conspiracy to Assault Tito and Victor Fontanez

Text: 114 Morales argues that there was insufficient evidence to support his conviction on two VICAR counts that charged him with conspiracies to assault two individuals, one known as Green Eyed Tito and the other named Victor Fontanez, in violation of Conn. Gen.Stat. §§ 53a-48, 53a-60. Although these VICAR counts were charged as direct violations of 18 U.S.C. § 1959(a)(6), Morales asserts that the evidence failed to show that Morales committed an overt act in furtherance of each conspiracy as required under Connecticut law. In addition, Morales claims that there was no evidence of serious bodily injury as required under § 1959(a)(6). These contentions are without merit. 115 First, the government is not required to prove an overt act under Connecticut law because the reference to violating state law in the VICAR count is only meant to indicate unlawful conduct that constitutes a predicate offense for a VICAR charge under § 1959(a)(6). See Miller, 116 F.3d at 675 (holding that RICO's allusion to state crimes was not intended to incorporate elements of state crimes, but only to provide a general substantive frame of reference); Concepcion, 983 F.2d at 380 (holding that VICAR was intended to compliment RICO); see also Orena, 32 F.3d at 714 (holding that VICAR indictment need not allege overt act element required for state predicate crime). Second, the record reflects that there was ample evidence for the jury to conclude that Morales conspired to assault Tito and Fontanez with resulting serious bodily injury. Accordingly, we find that there was sufficient evidence to sustain Morales' § 1959(a)(6) convictions. 116