State v. Bowen, AF-449
| Decision Date | 15 April 1982 |
| Docket Number | No. AF-449,AF-449 |
| Citation | 413 So.2d 798 |
| Parties | STATE of Florida, Appellant, v. Marion Alford BOWEN, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Barbara Ann Butler, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jacksonville, for appellant.
Lacy Mahon, Jr., of Mahon, Mahon & Farley, P. A., Jacksonville, for appellee.
The State has appealed the order of the trial court granting Bowen's Motion to Dismiss Count I of the information charging him with a violation of Florida's Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization Act (RICO Act). The issue presented on appeal is whether Florida's RICO Act is applicable to an individual conducting a sole proprietorship in a pattern of racketeering activity. Our review of the history of the Act and of the statutory language compels us to answer that question in the affirmative. We therefore reverse.
The facts are undisputed and show that Bowen, the sole proprietor of a mini-storage warehouse in which he bought and sold gold and silver, was the subject of a general investigation of gold and silver dealers jointly initiated by the Florida Department of Law Enforcement and the Jacksonville Sheriff's office in January, 1981. As a result of the investigation, Bowen was arrested and charged by information with violation of Florida's RICO Act, Section 943.462(3), Florida Statutes (1979), and three separate counts of dealing in stolen property in violation of Section 812.019, Florida Statutes (1979). Bowen filed a Motion to Dismiss, challenging Count I for failure to properly charge the commission of an offense. The trial court granted Bowen's motion, thereby dismissing the RICO count.
The Florida RICO Act was enacted to resist organized crime from infiltrating and corrupting legitimate businesses by providing an outlet for illegally obtained capital, from harming innocent investors, entrepreneurs, merchants and consumers, and from interfering with free competition and thereby constituting a substantial danger to the economic and general welfare of the state. See generally Note, Racketeers and Non-Racketeers Alike Should Fear Florida's RICO Act, 6 F.S.U.L.Rev. 483 (1978); and State v. Whiddon, 384 So.2d 1269 (Fla.1980). Specifically, Section 943.462(3) makes it unlawful for any person "employed by, or associated with, any enterprise to conduct or participate, directly or indirectly, in such enterprise through a pattern of racketeering activity or the collection of an unlawful debt." Bowen argues, however, that that section does not contemplate an individual associating with an "enterprise" that is himself, in a "pattern of racketeering activity." On the contrary, the plain and unambiguous language of the statute would suggest otherwise.
To begin, "racketeering activity," as defined by Section 943.461, Florida Statutes, specifically includes Section 812.019, prohibiting the trafficking in stolen property, the offense with which Bowen was charged. See Section 943.461(1)(a)15.
Moreover, "enterprise," as defined by subsection...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Gross v. State
...courts for guidance in construing RICO provisions. See, e.g., State v. Nishi, 521 So.2d 252, 253 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988); State v. Bowen, 413 So.2d 798, 799 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982). FEDERAL RICO STATUTE The federal RICO statute provides, inter alia, that "[i]t shall be unlawful for any person employ......
-
Leonard v. Dennis
...465 So.2d 538 ... 10 Fla. L. Weekly 346 ... James A. LEONARD, State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, Budget Rent-A-Car of Tampa, Inc., and Liberty Mutual ... ...
-
Wilson v. State, 90-845
...and apart from the racketeering activity in which it engages). The state has argued that this court's decision in State v. Bowen, 413 So.2d 798 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982), rev. denied, 424 So.2d 760 (Fla.1983), is controlling. In Bowen, the defendant was the sole proprietor of a mini-storage wareh......
-
IN RE STANDARD JURY INST. IN CRIMINAL CASES-SUBMISSION 2002-1, SC02-657.
...of conduct. As to whether an individual can be an enterprise see State v. Nishi, 521 So.2d 252 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988), and State v. Bowen, 413 So.2d 798 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983), rev. den. 424 So.2d Lesser Included Offenses No lesser included offenses have been identified for this offense. Comment T......