Custom Search

Monday, January 12, 2009

Boyle -vs- United States

The United States argued that the individuals were an enterprise and that they did not need to prove a formal structure existed under RICO.

Please click onto the COMMENTS for the story

7 Comments:

Blogger Bob said...

Boyle v. United States (07-1309)
Oral argument: January 14, 2009

Appealed from: United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit (November 19, 2007)

RACKETEER INFLUENCED AND CORRUPT ORGANIZATIONS ACT, RICO, ASSOCIATION-IN-FACT ENTERPRISE, RACKETEERING, DUE PROCESS, FIFTH AMENDMENT
A jury convicted Edmund Boyle of racketeering and racketeering conspiracy under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act ("RICO"), and sentenced him to 151 months in prison for his participation in a string of bank robberies. Boyle appealed his conviction to the Second Circuit, arguing that the United States misinterpreted the scope of an "enterprise" under RICO. Boyle argued that RICO did not apply because the United States could not prove that the group of bank robbers was an enterprise if it could not prove the group had a formal, ascertainable structure. The United States argued that the individuals were an enterprise and that they did not need to prove a formal structure existed under RICO. The Second Circuit affirmed the conviction. The Supreme Court granted Boyle's petition to determine a three-way circuit split over what constitutes an enterprise under the RICO statute. The outcome of this case will affect the scope of the RICO Act and will impact the ability of law enforcement to prosecute individuals under the RICO Act.

link to the rest of the story here

12:55 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Bob,

But, there was never any doubt that bank robbers had an intended benefit... to get money. What the City RICO case misses is who gets something for selected landlords going out of business? The case fails for lack of party that gets something.

Now, if you say improved health, safety and quality of life for the City, then you are wiping out the front end of RICO, which is a victim. Because if all they were doing was trying to comply with the code for the intended purpose then we don't have a crime.

So, you need a victim... someone that lost something that they shouldn't have lost... a conspiracy and the group doesn't need a formal structure and we need someone who gets something out of this criminal endeavor!!

Just trying to help.

JMONTOMEPPOF

Chuck Repke

1:07 PM  
Blogger Bob said...

Chuck, I am not taking a position on this one. It was a requested post.

1:12 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Great Link, numerous blogs out there blogrunner,scotus. Your link is great, put to search engine's

3:25 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The city recieved money in permit fees, court fines,plus millions of dollars in HUD money that they lied to get their hands on.

5:44 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Chuck if the city wants a landlord to evict a tenant due to his behavior then why doesn't the city just trespass them from the city?Why does the city want the landlord to do the dirty work?

I'll tell you why....Because most of the people with behavior issues in St.Paul would be a majority of minorities.And if the city adopted policy that of the one they are forcing the landlords to live by they would be sued for having a desparate impact on the people of color.



Rod

12:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Rod, what in the world are you talking about?

If you are leasing a house to someone that has a lot of police calls, you are going to pay a fine. Now, you can either pay the fine and do nothing or you can evict the tenant. Your call.

Most people believe that if you have a no tolerance policy towards behavior issues, sooner or later the people with the behavior problems will have to learn to control their behaviors. WHAT A CONSEPT!!!

What you ass holes figure is that it is the inner city and people should be aloud to raise hell and destroy other peoples lives. You wouldn't live there, but you will milk the last dollar out of a crap piece of rental that is unsafe for anyone to live in because you figure you can. And, when it starts to fall down you let the dump go back to the bank and blame the City for having to high of a code standard.

Hell, you figure all of us that live in the City are scum anyway so we deserve the crap that you harbor in your buildings. Hell we already know what kind of a RACIST ASS HOLE you are because you want to accuse all people of color of tollerating the bull shit that you are OK with.

Well, jerk who do you think it is that loses quality of life, peace of mind and property values because of jerks like you? Far, far to often communities of color.

But, what do you care.

JMONTOMEPPOF

Chuck Repke

9:26 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home