Opinion ID: 783826
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Position-Related Motivation Requirement of VCAR

Text: 56 The VCAR statute authorizes the Government to prosecute defendants for violent crimes intended, inter alia, to permit a defendant to maintain or increase [her] position in a RICO enterprise. United States v. Concepcion, 983 F.2d 369, 381 (2d Cir.1992). The Defendants first challenge the sufficiency of the evidence establishing that they killed Santiago for the purpose of maintaining or increasing their positions in the Netas. Specifically, they argue that they killed Santiago out of fear that he would kill them and to prevent him from doing so. Although [§] 1959(a) does not define the phrase `for the purpose of ... maintaining or increasing [a defendant's] position in an enterprise,' we interpret that phrase by its plain terms ..., giving the ordinary meaning to its terms. Dhinsa, 243 F.3d at 671. Thus, on its face, [§] 1959 encompasses violent crimes intended to preserve the defendant's position in the enterprise or to enhance [her] reputation and wealth within that enterprise. Id. (emphasis omitted). As we explained in Concepcion, 983 F.2d at 381, the Government is not required to prove that maintaining or increasing [a defendant's] position in the RICO enterprise was the defendant's sole or principal motive. Rather, we have consistently held that the motive requirement is satisfied if `the jury could properly infer that the defendant committed his violent crime because he knew it was expected of him by reason of his membership in the enterprise or that he committed it in furtherance of that membership.' Dhinsa, 243 F.3d at 671 (quoting Concepcion, 983 F.2d at 381). 4 57 Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the Government, the jury could have inferred beyond a reasonable doubt that the Defendants murdered Santiago to maintain or increase their positions in the Netas. That evidence established that, throughout the Fall of 1994, Pimentel consolidated her power, freezing out Santiago from his leadership position and surrounding herself with people like Garcia and Viruet, who were loyal to her. After his trial, Santiago was stripped of his rank, and when he responded with anger, Pimentel ordered him to be watched. When Santiago continued to threaten Pimentel and Garcia, she ordered his murder. Based on this evidence, the jury was entitled to conclude that Pimentel ordered Santiago's murder to preserve and cement both her authority as a leader of the Netas and her control over the discipline of the Netas' members. Similarly, the jury was entitled to conclude that Viruet, a loyal chapter president, participated in the murder to advance his own position within the Netas.