• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

Page 1 640 F.2d 1069, 106 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2673, 7 Fed. R. Evid. Serv. 1318 (Cite as: 640 F.2d 1069) Affirmed. United States Court of Appeals, West Headnotes Second Circuit. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, [1] Extortion 164T 19 v. 164T Extortion Michael CLEMENTE, Tino Fiumara, Thomas 164Tk18 Federal Offenses Buzzanca, Vincent Colucci, Carol Gardner, Michael 164Tk19 k. In general. Most Cited Cases Copolla and Gerald Swanton, Defendants-Appellants. (Formerly 165k25.1, 165k25 Extortion and Threats) [FN*] “Extortion” as defined in Hobbs Act consists of use FN* Editor's Note : The opinion of the United of wrongful means to achieve a wrongful objective. 18 States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit in U.S.C.A. § 1951(b)(2). United States v. Chesher, published in the ad- [2] Extortion 164T 43 vance sheets at this citation (640 F.2d 1069), was withdrawn from bound volume at the re- 164T Extortion quest of the Court. 164Tk40 Trial 164Tk43 k. Instructions. Most Cited Cases Nos. 549 to 553, Dockets 80-1261, 80-1263, 80-1271, (Formerly 165k33 Extortion and Threats) 80-1273 and 80-1275. Instruction authorizing conviction of extortion in Argued Nov. 5, 1980. violation of Hobbs Act upon finding that defendant used Decided Feb. 26, 1981. fear of economic loss to obtain money from persons in Rehearing Denied April 14, 1981. New York and New Jersey waterfront businesses was Defendants were convicted in the United States legally sufficient. 18 U.S.C.A. § 1951. District Court for the Southern District of New York, [3] Criminal Law 110 1159.2(5) Leonard B. Sand, J., on charges predicated upon their involvement in racketeering activity in the New York 110 Criminal Law and New Jersey waterfront businesses, and they ap- 110XXIV Review pealed. The Court of Appeals, Meskill, Circuit Judge, 110XXIV(P) Verdicts held that: (1) evidence, which indicated that defendant 110k1159 Conclusiveness of Verdict obtained payoffs from waterfront businessman by 110k1159.2 Weight of Evidence in General threatening him with loss of certain accounts, was suffi- 110k1159.2(5) k. Substantial evidence. cient to support defendant's conviction of extortion in Most Cited Cases violation of Hobbs Act; (2) finding that defendant ar- Verdict of a jury must be sustained if there is sub- ranged meeting between extortion victim and recipient stantial evidence, taking view most favorable to govern- of payoffs with intent to make kickback scheme succeed ment, to support it. was sufficient factual predicate for imposing criminal li- ability for defendant's aiding and abetting recipient in [4] Extortion 164T 39(2) violation of Hobbs Act; and (3) evidence, which estab- lished that defendant assisted both parties to the transac- 164T Extortion tion, was sufficient to support defendant's conviction for 164Tk35 Evidence aiding and abetting receipt of illegal labor payments. 164Tk39 Weight and Sufficiency 164Tk39(2) k. Federal offenses. Most Cited © 2013 Thomson Reuters. No Claim to Orig. US Gov. Works. Page 2 640 F.2d 1069, 106 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2673, 7 Fed. R. Evid. Serv. 1318 (Cite as: 640 F.2d 1069) Cases [8] Extortion 164T 30 (Formerly 165k32 Extortion and Threats) Evidence, which indicated that defendant obtained 164T Extortion payoffs from waterfront businessman by threatening 164Tk30 k. Parties; aiding and abetting. Most Cited him with loss of certain accounts, was sufficient to sup- Cases port defendant's conviction of extortion in violation of (Formerly 165k28 Extortion and Threats) Hobbs Act. 18 U.S.C.A. § 1951. Finding that defendant arranged meeting between extortion victim and recipient of payoffs with intent to [5] Criminal Law 110 59(5) make kickback scheme succeed was sufficient factual predicate for imposing criminal liability for defendant's 110 Criminal Law aiding and abetting recipient in violation of Hobbs Act. 110VII Parties to Offenses 18 U.S.C.A. § 1951. 110k59 Principals, Aiders, Abettors, and Accom- plices in General [9] Labor and Employment 231H 3283 110k59(5) k. Aiding, abetting, or other parti- cipation in offense. Most Cited Cases 231H Labor and Employment To aid and abet commission of a crime, a defendant 231HXX Offenses and Penalties must in some sort associate himself with the venture, 231HXX(B) Prosecutions participate in it as something that he wishes to bring 231Hk3283 k. Weight and sufficiency of evid- about and seek by his action to make it succeed. ence. Most Cited Cases (Formerly 232Ak1059 Labor Relations) [6] Criminal Law 110 792(1) Evidence, which established that defendant assisted both parties to the transaction, was sufficient to support 110 Criminal Law defendant's conviction for aiding and abetting receipt of 110XX Trial illegal labor payments. Labor Management Relations 110XX(G) Instructions: Necessity, Requisites, Act, 1947, § 302(b), 29 U.S.C.A. § 186(b). and Sufficiency 110k792 Principals and Accessories [10] Commerce 83 82.6 110k792(1) k. Necessity of instructions. Most Cited Cases 83 Commerce In prosecution of defendants for engaging in racket- 83II Application to Particular Subjects and Methods eering activity, trial court properly charged jury with re- of Regulation spect to aiding and abetting counts lodged against one 83II(J) Offenses and Prosecutions defendant who allegedly arranged meeting between ex- 83k82.5 Federal Offenses and Prosecutions tortion victim and alleged boss of enterprise. 83k82.6 k. In general. Most Cited Cases (Formerly 83k82.5) [7] Extortion 164T 19 Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations 164T Extortion 319H 36 164Tk18 Federal Offenses 164Tk19 k. In general. Most Cited Cases 319H Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (Formerly 165k25.1, 165k25 Extortion and Threats) 319HI Federal Regulation Whether a Hobbs Act defendant personally receives 319HI(A) In General any benefit from his alleged extortion is largely irrelev- 319Hk33 Enterprise ant for purpose of determining guilt under the Act. 18 319Hk36 k. Informal entities; associations- U.S.C.A. § 1951. in-fact. Most Cited Cases (Formerly 83k82.73) © 2013 Thomson Reuters. No Claim to Orig. US Gov. Works. Page 3 640 F.2d 1069, 106 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2673, 7 Fed. R. Evid. Serv. 1318 (Cite as: 640 F.2d 1069) Enterprise charged in RICO indictment, a group of [14] Criminal Law 110 1169.11 individuals associated in fact for purpose of establishing a pattern of racketeering activity in the New York and 110 Criminal Law New Jersey waterfront businesses, was not outside 110XXIV Review scope of term “enterprise” as employed in the statute. 110XXIV(Q) Harmless and Reversible Error 18 U.S.C.A. § 1961(4). 110k1169 Admission of Evidence 110k1169.11 k. Evidence of other offenses [11] Indictment and Information 210 71.4(1) and misconduct. Most Cited Cases Even if fraudulent loan applications were improp- 210 Indictment and Information erly admitted against defendant union official to prove 210V Requisites and Sufficiency of Accusation facts collateral to charges in the indictment, error in 210k71 Certainty and Particularity their admission was harmless in view of substantial 210k71.4 Particular Allegations and Offenses evidence introduced against defendant. 210k71.4(1) k. In general. Most Cited Cases [15] Witnesses 410 337(14) RICO conspiracy count against defendants, who al- legedly formed an association for purpose of establish- 410 Witnesses ing a pattern of racketeering activity in the New York 410IV Credibility and Impeachment and New Jersey waterfront industry, was not unconstitu- 410IV(B) Character and Conduct of Witness tionally vague. 18 U.S.C.A. § 1962(d). 410k334 Witnesses Who May Be Impeached as to Character [12] Criminal Law 110 847 410k337 Accused as Witness in Criminal Prosecution 110 Criminal Law 410k337(5) Former Accusation or Con- 110XX Trial viction of Crime 110XX(I) Instructions: Objections and Excep- 410k337(14) k. Particular offenses. tions Most Cited Cases 110k847 k. Effect of failure to object or ex- (Formerly 410k337(5)) cept. Most Cited Cases Defendant's prior Taft-Hartley conviction was prop- Defendants waived any objection to the charge con- erly admitted after defendant denied facts underlying cerning RICO conspiracy by failing to object to charge. the conviction. Fed.Rules Evid. Rule 609(a), 28 18 U.S.C.A. § 1962(d). U.S.C.A. [13] Witnesses 410 344(1) *1071 Alan M. Dershowitz, Cambridge, Mass. (Nathan Dershowitz, Jeanne Baker, David Fine, Cambridge, 410 Witnesses Mass., of counsel, Richard Strafter, Holly Skolnick, 410IV Credibility and Impeachment John Batter, Joann Crispi, Cambridge, Mass., on the 410IV(B) Character and Conduct of Witness brief), for defendant-appellant Clemente. 410k344 Particular Acts or Facts 410k344(1) k. In general. Most Cited Cases Carl M. Bornstein, New York City (Barry A. Bohrer, In prosecution of union official for engaging in New York City, of counsel), for defendant-appellant racketeering activity in New York and New Jersey wa- Colucci. terfront industry, trial court did not abuse its discretion in allowing government to make inquiries into conduct Herbert O. Reid, Sr., Howard University School of Law, of defendant which bore on his character for truthful- Washington, D.C. (William A. Borders, Jr., Washing- ness. Fed.Rules Evid. Rule 403, 28 U.S.C.A. ton, D.C., of counsel), for defendant-appellant Gardner. © 2013 Thomson Reuters. No Claim to Orig. US Gov. Works. Page 4 640 F.2d 1069, 106 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2673, 7 Fed. R. Evid. Serv. 1318 (Cite as: 640 F.2d 1069) Irving Anolik, New York City, for defendants-appel- as the New Jersey waterfront “boss” but was subordin- lants Buzzanca, Fiumara and Copolla. ate to Clemente; Copolla was a personal assistant to Fi- umara; Gardner and Colucci were presidents of two Maurice M. McDermott, New York City (Paul R. New Jersey International Longshoremen's Association Grand, Norman L. Ostrow, Grand & Ostrow, New York (ILA) locals and answered directly to Fiumara in con- City, of counsel), for defendant-appellant Swanton.

Load more

  17

Copy Link