UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Donald TILLE, Defendant-Appellant

Good Law
729 F.2d 615·15 Fed. R. Serv. 597·1984 U.S. App. LEXIS 24078
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 29, 198482-1757, 82-1758California3,207 words

Opinion

Opinion

Wright, J.

Appellants challenge their convictions of conspiracy to violate federal anti-racketeering law. They contend that the court erred in (1) allowing Burrows’ trial on an insufficient indictment and conviction on insufficient evidence, (2) admitting into evidence various coconspirator statements, (3) admitting evidence of Tide’s flight, (4) not severing Tille’s trial from his codefendants’, and (5) instructing the jury on conspiracy.

Tille (a/k/a/ Bob Cannon) and Burrows were indicted along with two others (Satiacum and Taylor) under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO). 18 U.S.C. §§ 1961-68 . The indictment charged appellants with conspiracy to violate anti-racketeering law, by being associated with a racketeering enterprise and participating in the conduct of its affairs through a pattern of racketeering activity. 18 U.S.C. § 1962 (c), (d).

The racketeering enterprise was a sole proprietorship owned and controlled by Robert Satiacum, known as Satiacum Enterprises. Satiacum Enterprises owned or operated, in whole or in part, many businesses, mostly within the Western District of Washington.

The conspiracy allegedly continued from 1975 to June 15, 1982. Its…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.