Legal Question Assignment

Homework Details

Using the format provided below brief the following case attached in PDF format.

Format to be used for Briefs (Make sure you divide your briefs into these sections):

1. Case title & citation

2. Issue (a combination of the key facts and the legal question the court is being asked to decide in the case)

3. Rule (the law that court identifies as applicable to the case)

4. Application (how does the court apply the law to the facts and issue in the case)

5. Conclusion (a brief statement of the case outcome)

Sample Answer

Danies

Florida National University

CCJ 4644

Dr. Moore

United States Vs. Turkette

United States v. Turkette, 452 U.S. 576 (1981) is a case that was heard by the Supreme Court of the United States.

No. 80-808

Arguments presented on April 27, 1981

Conclusion reached on June 17th, 1981

452 U.S. 576

Syllabus

The Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) chapter of the United States Code can be found in Title 18 of the United States Code. This chapter was added to Title 18 as part of the Organized Crime Control Act of 1970. It is against the law to do so, according to section 1962(c) of Title 18 of the United States Code.

“for any person employed by or associated with any enterprise engaged in, or the activities of which affect, interstate or foreign commerce, to conduct or participate, directly or indirectly, in the conduct of such enterprise’s affairs through a pattern of racketeering activity or collection of unlawful debt.” This phrase means that it is illegal “for any person employed by or associated with any enterprise engaged in, or the activities of which affect, interstate or foreign commerce to conduct or participate, directly or indirectly, in the conduct

In Title 18 United States Code Section 1961(4), the word “business” is defined as including:

“any individual, partnership, corporation, association, or other legal entity, and any union or group of individuals associated in fact but not a legal entity” “any union or group of individuals associated in fact while not a legal entity”

Respondent and others were charged in an indictment with various offenses, including conspiracy to violate section 1962. (c). According to the indictment, the enterprise that was being questioned consisted of a group of people who were in reality affiliated with one another for the aim of participating in specific illegal actions. Respondent was convicted in Federal District Court, but the Court of Appeals overturned the conviction on the grounds that RICO was intended solely to protect legitimate business enterprises from infiltration by racketeers, and does not make it criminal to participate in an association which performs only illegal acts and has not infiltrated or attempted to infiltrate a legitimate enterprise. This argument was based on the fact that RICO was intended solely to protect legitimate business enterprises from infiltration by racketeers, and that

The definition of “enterprise” in RICO is expansive enough to include both lawful and illegal business operations, and this interpretation is upheld. Pp. 452 U. S. 580-593.

(a) Neither the language nor the structure of RICO restricts its application to lawful businesses and organizations in any way. It would appear that both lawful and unlawful businesses fall under the definition of “enterprise” that is provided in section 1961(4), based only on how the term is written. The first category includes organizations like corporations, partnerships, and other “legal entities,” while the second category covers “any union or group of individuals associated in fact although not a legal entity.”

The section describes two distinct categories of associations that fall under the umbrella term “enterprise.” Because the second category does not provide a more comprehensive explanation of the first, the ejusdem generis principle cannot be correctly utilized to support the holding that the two categories are equivalent.