Moj Syabr Sachinenne Pa Bel Move

OPINION OF THE COURT CAPPY, Justice. Download driver modem huawei ce0682 for windows 7. The question presented is whether the Pennsylvania corrupt organizations statute (18 Pa.C.S. § 911 et seq.) can be applied to an individual who committed a series of criminal acts for his own benefit while employed by a legitimate enterprise, where the Commonwealth concedes that there are no identifiable ties between the individual, the enterprise and 'organized crime.' 1 For the reasons that follow we find that the actions of this defendant do not fall within the scope of the corrupt organizations statute. The defendant in the instant case is an employee of Thrift Drug, who was responsible for soliciting bids and awarding construction contracts.

TI SI MOJ SAN. Sections of this page. Accessibility Help. Press alt + / to open this menu. Email or Phone: Password: Forgot account? Fan of the Week. Info and Ads. See more of TI SI MOJ SAN on Facebook. Create New Account. See more of TI SI MOJ SAN on Facebook.

The defendant took advantage of his position in Thrift Drug to solicit bribes from various contractors over a period of approximately six years. The defendant either solicited direct cash payments from contractors in exchange for awarding them the contract, or utilized various contractors to improve his home at their own expense in exchange for awarding them contracts. Thrift Drug was not involved in the defendant's scheme. All money and home improvements garnered in this process directly benefitted the defendant alone. As a result of this conduct the defendant was charged with five counts of commercial bribery, 18 Pa. § 4108(a), one count of forgery, 18 Pa.C.S. § 4101(a)(3), one count of tampering with records or identification, 18 Pa.C.S.

§ 4101(a), and two counts of corrupt organizations, 18 Pa.C.S. Prior to trial the defendant filed a motion to quash various counts of the indictment. The trial court granted the motion as to counts six, eight and nine, thus terminating the forgery and corrupt organizations charges.

The Commonwealth appealed only the dismissal of the corrupt organizations counts to the Superior Court, where the decision of the trial court was affirmed in a memorandum opinion. This Court granted the Commonwealth's Petition for Allowance of Appeal. Although the Commonwealth concedes that this defendant has no ties to 'organized crime' as that term is defined within the corrupt organizations statute, and that Thrift Drug has no ties to 'organized crime,' they argue that the organized, systematic method by which the defendant committed his crimes brings him within the purview of the statute. This proposition ignores the very essence of the corrupt organizations statute as succinctly set forth by the General Assembly. When the General Assembly enacted the corrupt organizations statute it included a lengthy preamble setting forth the purpose and intended scope of the act: (a) Findings of fact.

We note that the federal courts have held that there is no requirement under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, 18 U.S.C.A. § 1961 et seq., for the prosecution to establish a nexus between the individual and/or the enterprise being charged and 'organized crime.' Northwestern Bell Telephone Co., et al.,, 109 S.Ct. 2893, 106 L.Ed.2d 195 (1989); Sedima, S.P.R.L. Imrex Inc., et al.,, 105 S.Ct. 3275, 87 L.Ed.2d 346 (1985); United States v. Stokes, (5th Cir.1991); United States v.

Ruiz, (1st Cir.1990); Jensen v. Snellings, (5th Cir.1988); Gilbert v. Prudential-Bache Securities, (3rd Cir.1985); Plains Resources Inc. Gable, (10th Cir.1986).

We do not find the interpretation of a federal statute to be controlling in our analysis of the Pennsylvania corrupt organizations statute.