United States v. Cassino, 910-914

CourtUnited States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (2nd Circuit)
Citation467 F.2d 610
Docket Number72-1192,No. 910-914,72-1235,72-1236,Docket 72-1160,72-1244.,910-914
PartiesUNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Charles CASSINO et al., Defendants-Appellants.
Decision Date11 August 1972

COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED

Irving Anolik, New York City, for defendants-appellants Charles Cassino and Michael Roman.

Roy M. Cohn, New York City (Saxe, Bacon & Bolan, New York City, Thomas A. Bolan, New York City, and Michael Rosen, Brooklyn, of counsel), for defendant-appellant Nicholas Rattenni.

William Sonenshine, Brooklyn, N. Y. (Evseroff, Newman & Sonenshine Brooklyn, N. Y.), for defendant-appellant Eugene Curico.

Morton N. Wekstein, Yonkers, N. Y., for defendant-appellant Vincent Malavarco.

Peter F. Rient, Asst. U. S. Atty., New York City (Whitney North Seymour, Jr., U. S. Atty. for the Southern District of New York, Edward M. Shaw, Asst. U. S. Atty., of counsel), for appellee.

Before MOORE, SMITH, and TIMBERS, Circuit Judges.

Certiorari Denied January 23, 1973. See 93 S.Ct. 957, 959.

MOORE, Circuit Judge:

Charles Cassino, Nicholas Rattenni, Eugene Curico, Vincent Malavarco, and Michael Roman appeal from judgments of convictionentered in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York after trial by jury before Judge Cooper. The five appellants, with seven others, were indicted on April 14, 1971, for conspiracy to violate and substantive violations of the Travel Act.1 Stated simply, the indictment charged the defendants with engaging in a concerted scheme to bribe New York State policemen in order to protect illegal gambling operations in New York from official interference. We affirm the appellants' convictions.

I.

The government's case rested upon the testimony of a senior investigator for the New York State Police, Joseph Colligan, and the agents who conducted surveillance of him and of the defendants. This testimony established the following case for the government.

A. Roman Contacts Colligan

During the afternoon of September 29, 1969, Colligan, who was assigned to the Stony Point State Police Station in Rockland County, New York, received a telephone call from Albert Parietti. Parietti asked Colligan to meet with him later in the afternoon. Colligan agreed and the two met later in the day. Parietti asked Colligan if he would meet with Michael Roman to discuss gambling operations in Rockland County. Colligan replied that he would have to consider the matter. The next day Colligan informed his superior of the conversation with Parietti.

Colligan met with Roman on October 1, 1969. This meeting was under surveillance. During the meeting Roman told Colligan that he was "authorized" to pay Colligan $500 just for sitting down and talking. "He then went on," testified Colligan, "to say that his organization had authorized him to come to see me, to make me a proposition to offer me $500 per month to protect his organization's gambling places in Rockland County."2

The offer was not attractive to Colligan; he asked Roman to arrange a meeting with "his people" to discuss more lucrative offers. Roman agreed and promised Colligan that if he sat down with Roman and the "Number 1" man, he would be made an offer he could not resist.

Apprehensive about Colligan's loyalties, Roman asked him whether he was "wired" (wearing a recording device). Colligan replied no; Roman responded by stating ". . . well, what could I get out of it, six months, and then only if you could prove it."3 Roman also was nervous about a gentleman sitting close by whom he believed to be one of Colligan's "people." Displaying considerable presence of mind, Colligan not only admitted this but also introduced the agent to Roman, telling the agent "Mike" was a friend of his. They then had a few drinks together.

B. Colligan Meets Number 1

On October 8, 1969, Colligan met with Roman and Number 1 in the parking lot of Christy's New Town House in Nyack, New York. Number 1 turned out to be Peter Variano, who was indicted with appellants but entered a plea of guilty prior to trial. Colligan got into Roman's car and the three drove for "a meal and some drinks" to the Las Vegas restaurant in Northvale, New Jersey. After telling Colligan that "this meeting has been a long time in coming,"4 Variano said that he had a "marriage" with several New York State policemen, naming appellants Cassino, Curico, and Malavarco. Cassino was a New York State police lieutenant and member of the New York State Joint Strike Force On Organized Crime, while Curico and Malavarco were senior investigators.

At the Las Vegas, Variano proposed to Colligan that for protection of his gambling operations in Rockland County Variano would pay $1000 per month plus fringe benefits—clothing, free trips to Las Vegas and Puerto Rico, a car, and free tickets to sports events. Colligan accepted the offer, and immediately thereafter Variano asked whether he could bring another bookmaking operation into Rockland County. Colligan responded favorably, at which point Variano told Roman to make a telephone call. While Roman was on the phone, Variano gave Colligan $1000 in hundred dollar bills. The new bookmaking operation was set up via the telephone call; Variano told Colligan that the two of them would split the proceeds from the operation and that they would probably each make $300 a week from it.

C. The Wednesday Meetings at the Las Vegas

From October 8, 1969, until the end of February, 1970, Variano and Colligan met virtually every week, usually on Wednesday evenings and usually at the Las Vegas. These meetings, occasionally attended by appellant Rattenni, generally included discussions of different aspects of Variano's gambling operations and the roles played by the various members of the state police who were being paid to protect those operations. Variano invariably paid for the food and drinks consumed and periodically gave cash payments of $1000 to Colligan, as well as assorted gifts (e. g., tickets to sporting events, clothes, a vacation to Puerto Rico).

1. The evidence of Rattenni's involvement.

At the weekly meeting of October 22, 1969, Variano told Colligan something of his relationship with Rattenni.

He Variano then went on, he said to me Colligan, "People are always trying to—people are always trying to relate me as a partner of Nicholas Rattenni\'s . . . .
. . . .
He stated that this wasn\'t so, that Nick Rattenni was in the refuse business, and at times he fronted money for him, if he was hit hard on a gambling hit, that he would—if he needed $20,000, $25,000 on a Monday morning or any day where he is hit hard on his books, that the man would give him the money.5

At the meeting of November 19, 1969, Variano and Colligan were joined by Rattenni. During the evening Variano spoke of bringing a crap game into the county. Rattenni offered the following advice.

Colligan
A. Mr. Rattenni told Mr. Variano that you have to go slow, you can\'t go too fast in the business, you take it easy and if you ran the crap game right, ran it two nights a week, that would be worth more than his business phones were at the present time. . . .
. . . . . .
At this time Mr. Rattenni said to Mr. Variano that "You don\'t expose him, don\'t let him get the house, you let your bookkeeper get the house for you and this way you don\'t expose him at all," meaning myself. Mr. Variano agreed with Mr. Rattenni that this was—
. . . . . .
A. Mr. Variano stated to Mr. Rattenni that this was right, that he would have his bookkeeper get the house, and then Mr. Rattenni asked Mr. Variano what my part would be in the operation. Mr. Variano told Mr. Rattenni that I would protect the game for him on the nights it was in operation.
Q. What did Mr. Rattenni say, if anything?
A. Mr. Rattenni said that this was a good thing.6

Rattenni at this same meeting also aired his opinion of Cassino, Curico, and Malavarco. While he praised Malavarco and Curico (". . . very good boy, did things without making noise. . . very classy person . . . didn't make any noise when he did anything for you."),7 he distrusted Cassino, believing him "too loud, makes too much noise, tries to be a big shot,"8 and advised Variano to get rid of him.9

In Rattenni's presence, Variano then gave Colligan copies of FBI search warrants in support of a raid in Nyack a month earlier, saying that he had asked Cassino to review them "with a fine tooth comb" with a view to contesting them in court, and asked Colligan to do the same.

At the December 1, 1969, meeting with Variano and Colligan, Rattenni mentioned an incident in which the FBI had returned an automobile to a bookmaker they had arrested and asked Colligan whether this was unusual. When Colligan replied that it was not unusual if there was too much money owed on the car, Rattenni said that the bookmaker had given a statement to the FBI, that the FBI was going to give him a new identity and move him to Virginia to work for them there, and that Variano "should get rid of this guy."10

On January 9, 1970, Rattenni was present when Colligan informed Variano that one Patsy Borgese was no longer the target of a Strike Force gambling investigation and when Variano told Colligan that he would make airline and hotel reservations for Colligan and his wife to go to Puerto Rico.

On February 4, 1970, Rattenni was present when Variano told Colligan, after paying him $1000 (not in Rattenni's presence): "I pay you, I don't know what you do with the money. I never ask you what you do with your money, I don't know whether you pay off one of your people or not, I never ask anyone what they do with it and I never pay anyone in front of anyone."11

2. Further evidence of Cassino's, Curico's and Malavarco's involvement.

During the meetings between them, Variano discussed in further detail with Colligan the services provided to his operations by Cassino, Curico, and Malavarco....

To continue reading

Request your trial
30 cases
  • United States v. Pisani
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York
    • 18 April 1984
    ...to obtain severance, must show more than that she has a better chance of acquittal at a separate trial. United States v. Cassino, 467 F.2d 610, 623 and nn. 37-39 (2d Cir. 1972), cert. denied, 410 U.S. 913, 93 S.Ct. 957, 34 L.Ed.2d 276 Godfrey's final assertion in favor of severance is that ......
  • U.S. v. Salerno
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Second Circuit
    • 31 January 1989
    ...Peltz, 433 F.2d at 51 ("unnecessary to a conspiracy that the relationship contemplated mutual benefit"); see also United States v. Cassino, 467 F.2d 610, 617 (2d Cir.1972) (evidence of "stake" in the venture sufficient where defendant protected venture from official interference, gave advic......
  • U.S. v. Pinkney, 75-2223
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — District of Columbia Circuit
    • 10 August 1976
    ...equivalent to playing with fire. The problem is that such an instruction is generally employed to favor one side."); United States v. Cassino, 467 F.2d 610, 619 (2d Cir.), cert. denied 410 U.S. 928, 93 S.Ct. 1363, 35 L.Ed.2d 590 (1973) (". . . hypothetical illustrations should be avoided be......
  • United States v. Manfredi
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Second Circuit
    • 23 November 1973
    ...U.S. 1028, 90 S.Ct. 1276, 25 L.Ed.2d 539 (1970). This independent evidence may be completely circumstantial. Cf. United States v. Cassino, 467 F.2d 610, 618 n.21 (2d Cir.1972), cert. denied, 410 U.S. 928, 93 S.Ct. 1363, 35 L.Ed.2d 590 (1973). By actual surveillance Joseph LaCosa was seen to......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT