Opinion ID: 770518
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Sale of the hotels - Edgewater

Text: 65 The evidence regarding the sale of the Edgewater Hotel, however, is a different matter. FBI agent Ruffino testifiedthat he overheard a conversation between Anthony Corrado, Vito Giacalone, and William Pompili, where they were discussing the sale of their interest in the Edgewater. Ruffino stated that he received from the sale of the hotel $800,000 and $1.6 million and having another $800,000 on December 31st, totalling $3.2 million. The district court attributed none of the $3,200,000 value to Anthony Corrado, Giacalone or Jack Tocco because the involvement in the Edgewater Hotel was not connected to the Detroit partnership except through the participation of members Anthony Corrado and Vito William Giacalone. (Emphasis added). Again, because the government did not show that the Detroit partnership received and distributed among themselves any amount of money . . . from the sale, forfeiture was denied, even as to Giacalone and Anthony Corrado. 66 In addition to the testimony of agent Ruffino, corroborating evidence from the Nevada Gaming Commission was submitted regarding the Edgewater interest. Also, there was evidence that Giacalone had meetings with Pompili, since deceased, in Las Vegas, and that Jack Tocco and Anthony Corrado also met with Pompili, who had architectural plans for the Edgewater Hotel and Casino. 67 Based on this evidence, which is considerably more substantial than the evidence relating to the sale of the Frontier, we find that it was clear error for the district court to deny forfeiture against Jack Tocco and Giacalone, jointly and severally, for the profits that the members of the enterprise shared from the sale of the Edgewater Hotel. The continuing activities were related to the illegal purposes of the conspiracy charged, and Giacalone's and Corrado's personal involvement confirms that the Cosa Nostra was involved in obtaining these illegal proceeds. The district court itself acknowledged the participation of defendants Anthony Corrado and Vito Giacalone and their involvement in the Edgewater Hotel transaction. As previously pointed out, the district court's requirement that the Detroit partnership must have received and distributed among themselves proceeds or monetary benefits from the Edgewater in order for forfeiture to attach was erroneous if any of the lead partners obtained financial benefits by reason of their participation or involvement in that enterprise. 68 We find irrelevant the district court's observation that the gambling activity carried on by these hotels was not illegal. The illegality of the transactions was the Detroit enterprise's concealment and misrepresentation involved in acquiring the secret interest held by the Detroit Cosa Nostra through straw men such as Pompili. This latter activity was sufficiently related to the charged conspiracy's pattern and practice of illegal activity with respect to gambling to put defendants on notice concerning potential forfeiture from the sale of the Edgewater Hotel. Item No. 13 of the indictment as to count one charged it to be a part of the conspiracy to use fronts or straw men to acquire interests in Nevada hotel casinos and to conceal their interests from the State of Nevada. Thus, we find that there was sufficient proof to establish that the Edgewater Hotel transaction was a part of the conspiracy herein, particularly as to Vito Giacalone (and as to Anthony Corrado if he is not granted a new trial upon remand). However, there is sufficient uncertainty as to the profits or revenues derived from that transaction to necessitate a remand to the district court on the Edgewater forfeiture question. Thus, upon remand, the district court should consider, under the standards herein established as to forfeiture, to what extent or degree forfeiture should be ordered against Jack Tocco and Vito Giacalone. 69