Opinion ID: 2977642
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: RICO Instructions

Text: Defendants argue that the district court’s instructions about the elements of the RICO conspiracy were irreconcilable with its general admonition to the jury not to let its findings about one defendant or charge influence its verdicts as to another. The district court instructed the jurors that: [Y]ou must decide whether the Government has presented proof beyond a reasonable doubt that a particular Defendant is guilty of a particular charge. Your decision on any one Defendant or one charge, whether it is guilty or not guilty, should not influence your decision on any of the other Defendants or charges. Trial Tr. at 2833-34. Later, while setting out the elements of a RICO conspiracy, the district court instructed the jury that a guilty verdict required, inter alia, a finding: [T]hat the Defendant deliberately joined or became a member of the conspiracy or agreement with knowledge of its purpose, agreeing that a member of the conspiracy, not necessarily himself, would conduct or participate in the affairs of the enterprise through a pattern of racketeering activity and the commission of at least two acts of racketeering activity. Id. at 2838. These instructions are not inconsistent. The former instructs the jury not to let its opinions about guilt or innocence of any one defendant (or, as to any one charge) color its views about the others. The latter explains that, in the limited context of a RICO conspiracy, the commission of a 16 predicate act of racketeering activity is imputed to each member of the conspiracy provided that the member to whom it is imputed specifically joined the conspiracy and agreed to the commission of the act in furtherance thereof.