U.S. v. De Peri
| Citation | 778 F.2d 963 |
| Decision Date | 13 December 1985 |
| Docket Number | Nos. 84-1566,84-1577,84-1571,s. 84-1566 |
| Parties | 19 Fed. R. Evid. Serv. 256 UNITED STATES of America v. DE PERI, Joseph. Appeal of Joseph DE PERI. UNITED STATES of America v. MARTIN, James. Appeal of James MARTIN. UNITED STATES of America v. LINSO, Dennis. Appeal of Dennis LINSO. UNITED STATES of America v. MORRELL, George. Appeal of George MORRELL. UNITED STATES of America v. PECIC, Henry. Appeal of Henry PECIC. UNITED STATES of America v. MURPHY, Theodore. Appeal of Theodore MURPHY. UNITED STATES of America v. KATZ, George. Appeal of George KATZ. to 84-1579, 84-1594 and 84-1599. |
| Court | United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (3rd Circuit) |
Susan I. Schulman (Argued), Spencer M. Wertheimer, Philadelphia, Pa., for appellant, Theodore Murphy.
Timothy J. Savage (Argued), Timothy J. Savage, P.C., Philadelphia, Pa., for appellant, George Katz.
Howard B. Klein (Argued), Asst. U.S. Atty., Chief, Corruption Section, Ronald H. Levine (Argued), Asst. U.S. Atty., Edward S.G. Dennis, Jr., U.S. Atty., Walter S. Batty, Jr., Asst. U.S. Atty., Chief of Appeals, Philadelphia, Pa., for appellee.
Malcolm L. Lazin (Argued), Shaun R. Eisenhauer, Rubin, Quinn and Moss, Philadelphia, Pa., for appellant, Joseph DePeri.
Joseph Fioravante (Argued), William J. Winning, Curran, Winning & Fioravanti, Media, Pa., for appellant, James Martin.
Nino V. Tinari, Nino V. Tinari, P.C., Philadelphia, Pa., for appellant, Dennis Linso.
Joel Harvey Slomsky (Argued), DiGiacomo & Slomsky, Philadelphia, Pa., for appellant, George Morrell.
Joseph N. Bongiovanni, III (Argued), Bongiovanni & Berger, Philadelphia, Pa., for appellant, Henry Pecic.
Before ADAMS, HUNTER, Circuit Judges, and STERN, * District Judge.
This case arises from a tragic chapter in the history of the Philadelphia Police Department dealing with conspiracy to extort protection money from video poker machine gambling operations and "numbers writers." In the spring of 1984, the grand jury investigating these activities issued an eighty-six count indictment against fifteen police officers, including a Deputy Commissioner and a Chief Inspector. For management purposes, the District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania ordered the severance of the defendants into two groups. Trial in this case dealing with the first group commenced on July 9, 1984. 1 On August 10, 1984, the jury returned a guilty verdict against the defendants on all submitted counts. 2 The trial court sentenced the defendants to prison terms of varying length. Deputy Commissioner Martin received eighteen years; Chief Inspector DePeri, fifteen years; Pecic, twelve years; Murphy, ten years; eight each for Linso and Katz; and Morrell received three. Defendants appeal their convictions and sentences for violations of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act ("RICO"), 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1962(d) (1982), the Hobbs Act, 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1951 (1982), and obstruction of justice, 18 U.S.C. Secs. 1503, 1510 (1982). For the reasons discussed below, we affirm.
On May 3, 1984, a federal grand jury returned a multiple count indictment against fifteen officers and former officers of the Philadelphia Police Department charging participation in a conspiracy to extort and extortion of protection money from video poker machine and illegal numbers lotteries operators. Count One of the indictment charged each defendant with conspiracy, racketeering, and extortion. Count Two charged each defendant with a substantive RICO violation. Counts Three, Four, and Five charged Police Department Deputy Commissioner James Martin with obstructing a criminal investigation by paying hush money to Northwest Division Vice Unit Officer Albert Ricci. Counts Six and Seven charged Martin and Joseph DePeri, a Police Department Chief Inspector, with obstructing justice by ordering the destruction of records concerning the extorted payments. Counts Eight through Eighty-six charged the defendants with Hobbs Act extortion.
At trial, the evidence centered on the defendants' activities in the Northwest Division from late 1979 to April 1984. The government's case included the testimony of Albert Ricci, former Northwest Division Vice Lieutenant Joseph Alvaro, and the victims of the extortion scheme. Alvaro, who reported directly to DePeri while the latter served as the Northwest Division's Inspector, was the government's key witness. Alvaro's testimony detailed how the extortion money was passed up the ranks from the bagmen to the Northwest Division's Inspector. In addition to Ricci's and Alvaro's testimony, the government introduced tape recordings of face-to-face and telephone conversations, primarily between Alvaro and Martin, DePeri, and Ricci.
The Philadelphia Police Department is organized into geographic divisions, with each division composed of approximately two districts. Each division also contains a vice unit charged with investigating violations of the city's and Pennsylvania's vice laws, including illicit gambling. Until 1980, Harry Pecic was the vice lieutenant in the Northwest Division. In late 1979, the evidence shows that Pecic began to extort protection payments from numbers writers and video poker machine operators. After he was transferred to another division, Pecic met with Alvaro at Inspector DePeri's request and provided Alvaro with the list of protected numbers and poker machine establishments located in the Northwest Division. DePeri also told Alvaro to use the code name "Whitey" to identify himself to the operators when he collected the money.
Joseph DePeri was appointed Inspector of the Northwest Division in December, 1980. DePeri selected Joseph Alvaro as his vice lieutenant to replace Pecic after DePeri's first choice for vice lieutenant, defendant George Katz, was rejected by the Police Commissioner. Alvaro testified that DePeri discussed collecting the protection money with him, and instructed Alvaro to build up the collection list and to pick one of the members of his vice squad as the bagman.
Alvaro chose Albert Ricci to be the bagman. With the list of protected locations provided by Pecic, Ricci collected payments from old clients and expanded the scheme by adding new ones, primarily video machine vendors, to the list. The evidence shows that Ricci increased business by seizing unprotected poker machines and transporting them to Northwest Division Headquarters. Ricci would then hook the vendors into the scheme by offering to sell the machines back to them with the understanding they could continue to use the machines for gambling if Ricci received a monthly stipend of fifty to one hundred dollars per machine. Ricci would collect the payments twice a month and would pass the payments to Alvaro, who in turn passed approximately two-thirds of the money to DePeri. Alvaro managed the extortion scheme, comparing notes with Ricci to ensure that all the victims had paid up before Alvaro delivered the money to DePeri. Eventually, the protection scheme expanded to the point where Ricci's share of the collection increased from three hundred to fifteen hundred dollars per month, out of a gross of six thousand dollars per month.
George Katz, DePeri's first choice for Alvaro's slot, remained a lieutenant in the North Division. Alvaro testified that DePeri instructed him to allow Katz to collect some protection payments in the Northwest Division "to give George Katz an opportunity to make a few dollars for himself."
The Northwest Division contains two districts, the Fifth and the Thirty-ninth. Captain Dennis Linso commanded the Northwest Division's Fifth Division where Officer George Morrell worked as a patrolman. Alvaro and Ricci testified that Linso also extorted protection payments, employing Morrell as his bagman.
Lieutenant Theodore Murphy commanded the Southwest Division's vice unit. Alvaro testified that Murphy had called him to inquire as to whether Alvaro received protection money from a certain vendor. Donald Devore, a video game vendor, testified that he paid protection money directly to Murphy. William Dawley, also a video game vendor with machines in the Southwest Division, testified that he paid protection money to Central Division Inspector John DeBenedetto, an unindicted coconspirator. This money was later transferred to the Southwest Division. Dawley also testified that he had met with Murphy on one occasion to verify the locations of Dawley's video poker machines.
James Martin entered the conspiracy when he served as Night Command Inspector, working in the office across the hall from Inspector DePeri. Martin began collecting protection money from Lester Barry, a numbers writer, in early 1982. When DePeri was appointed Chief Inspector in June 1982, Martin was promoted to Northwest Division Inspector. Despite this change in personnel, the extortion scheme proceeded uninterrupted: Ricci continued to pass the money to Alvaro, who then gave it to Martin. After Alvaro was promoted to Captain in the Police Radio Division in July 1982, Ricci testified that he delivered the payments directly to Martin. Martin remained at the Northwest Division until November 1983, when he was appointed Deputy Commissioner.
In November 1982, a federal grand jury served subpoenas for the contents of certain Central Division officers' desks, including Inspector DeBenedetto's. 3 Learning of this, Chief Inspector DePeri called Captain Alvaro at Police Radio, and instructed him to destroy the two copies of the poker machine payoff list kept at Northwest Division Headquarters. Alvaro returned to the headquarters, broke into Martin's desk, and retrieved Martin's poker machine payoff list. Alvaro also searched Ricci's desk and...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Riley v. Snyder, Civ. A. No. 91-438-JJF.
... ... Alabama, 443 F.2d 854, 856 (5th Cir.1971), cert. denied, 405 U.S. 976, 92 S.Ct. 1202, 31 L.Ed.2d 251 (1972); see also United States v. De Peri, 778 F.2d 963, 972-73 (3d Cir.1985) ("The decision whether to sequester the jury lies wholly within the discretion of the district court."). The ... ...
-
U.S. v. Vastola
... ... The issue before us is whether the district court retained subject matter jurisdiction to grant a time extension for the government's filing of a notice of appeal. We ... The district court, relying on United States v. Dicker, 853 F.2d 1103 (3d Cir.1988), and United States v. De Peri, 778 F.2d 963 (3d Cir.1985), cert. denied, 475 U.S. 1110, 106 S.Ct. 1518, 89 L.Ed.2d 916 (1986), held that the above testimony was admissible under ... ...
-
U.S. v. Boylan
... ... The nature of the "more", however, remains somewhat obscure ... In the absence of any pat formula, the Court has instructed us to use a flexible approach toward the pattern requirement, "deriv[ing] from a common-sense, everyday understanding of RICO's language and Congress' ... ...
-
U.S. v. Salerno
... ... 2781, 2786, 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979) (emphasis in original) ... Id. at 828. Furthermore, ... It is not for us to weigh the evidence or to determine the credibility of witnesses. The verdict of a jury must be sustained if there is substantial evidence, taking ... ...
-
Experts
...and argument “are not evidence” and was told “to decide the case solely on the evidence received at trial”); United States v. De Peri, 778 F.2d 963, 978-79 (3rd Cir. 1985) (visual aid chart used during opening statement in complex conspiracy case); United States v. Martinez, No. 3:09–CR–5, ......
-
Table of Cases
...United States v. Davis, 726 F.3d 434 (3d Cir. 2013), 13 United States v. Day, 789 F.2d 1217 (6th Cir. 1986), 9 United States v. De Peri, 778 F.2d 963 (3rd Cir. 1985), 231 United States v. Del Valle, 587 F.2d 699 (5th Cir. 1979), 19, 22 United States v. Deloitte LLP, 610 F.3d 129 (D.C. Cir. ......