Georgia RICO et seq.
Georgia’s Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act is codified at O.C.G.A. Sections 16-14-1 through 16-14-15. The statute prohibits acquiring or maintaining an interest in property through a pattern of racketeering activity, conducting or participating in an enterprise through a pattern of racketeering activity, conspiring to violate these provisions, or using income derived from a pattern of racketeering activity to acquire an interest in property. Georgia RICO is broader than federal RICO in several respects and has become a primary prosecution tool for complex multi-defendant cases.
Consider this scenario: You are a member of a social group, and several other members commit crimes. Under Georgia’s RICO statute, the prosecution may try to charge you with racketeering based on your association with the group, even if you personally committed no criminal acts.
Pattern of Racketeering Activity
A pattern of racketeering activity requires at least two acts of racketeering activity within a four-year period, excluding any period of imprisonment. The acts must be related to each other and must demonstrate continuity or the threat of continuity. ThA relatedness requirement means the acts must share a common scheme, plan, or purpose. The law allows challenge whether the alleged predicate acts are sufficiently related to constitute a pattern rather than isolated, unconnected criminal conduct.
Predicate Acts
Georgia RICO defines racketeering activity broadly to include a wide range of state and federal offenses serving as predicates. State predicates include murder, kidnapping, robbery, burglary, drug offenses, theft, fraud, forgery, and many others. The list is substantially broader than federal RICO predicates. Your attorney’s strongest approach is to verify that each alleged predicate act actually qualifies as racketeering activity under the statute and challenge any predicate that does not meet the statutory definition.
Enterprise Element
The prosecution must prove the existence of an enterprise, defined as any person, sole proprietorship, partnership, corporation, trust, union, government entity, or any group of individuals associated in fact although not a legal entity. The associated-in-fact enterprise need not have a formal structure; it requires only a group of persons associated for a common purpose. Experienced defense attorneys typically challenge whether the alleged enterprise has sufficient structure and continuity to qualify, particularly in cases where the prosecution stretches the enterprise concept to encompass loosely connected individuals. The U.S. Supreme Court in Boyle v. United States, 556 U.S. 938 (2009), held that an associated-in-fact enterprise requires proof of an ongoing organization with a common purpose whose members function as a continuing unit.
The structure need not be hierarchical or formal, but there must be something more than a group of individuals who happen to commit crimes near each other. In high-profile Georgia RICO prosecutions, the enterprise element has become the most heavily litigated issue because prosecutors have pushed the definition to encompass loosely connected social groups, street gangs identified primarily through social media, and organizations whose structure exists more in prosecutorial theory than in operational reality. Challenging the enterprise element requires demonstrating that the alleged group lacks genuine organizational structure, shared decision-making, and continuity beyond individual criminal transactions.
Penalties
A conviction under Georgia RICO carries five to twenty years imprisonment, a fine of up to $25,000, or three times the value gained from the violation, whichever is greater. Additionally, the statute provides for forfeiture of any property acquired through the racketeering activity and any interest in the enterprise. These penalties are in addition to sentences for the underlying predicate offenses.
RICO Conspiracy
Georgia RICO includes a conspiracy provision that does not require proof of an overt act. A defendant may be convicted of RICO conspiracy by agreeing to the commission of two or more predicate acts, even if none of the agreed-upon acts are actually committed. This provision is broader than the general conspiracy statute and allows prosecution based primarily on evidence of agreement rather than substantive conduct. ThSuch absence of an overt act requirement is the most dangerous feature of Georgia RICO conspiracy for defendants. A person can be convicted of RICO conspiracy based entirely on evidence of an agreement, even if no predicate act was ever committed and the defendant never engaged in any criminal conduct.
This means wiretapped conversations, text messages, and cooperating witness testimony about discussions can sustain a conspiracy conviction without any completed crime. Your attorney must attack the evidence of agreement directly, arguing that the defendant’s association with alleged co-conspirators, knowledge of their activities, or even presence during discussions does not establish the required agreement to participate in a pattern of racketeering activity through an enterprise.
Severance and Joinder Issues
RICO prosecutions frequently involve multiple defendants charged in a single indictment. The joinder of numerous defendants creates significant challenges for individual your defense attorney, including spillover prejudice from evidence admissible against co-defendants, the difficulty of presenting individualized defenses in a multi-defendant trial, and the logistical burdens of coordinating among multiple defense teams. The critical step for your defense is to file motions for severance when the joinder creates substantial prejudice to the individual defendant.
Defending Georgia RICO Charges
Key defenses include challenging the existence of an enterprise, challenging whether the predicate acts form a pattern, challenging the defendant’s connection to the enterprise, arguing that the defendant withdrew from the enterprise before the charged conduct, and challenging individual predicate acts on their merits. RICO prosecutions are complex and document-intensive, requiring your attorney to master large volumes of evidence and coordinate with co-defendants’ counsel on common issues.