## Facts

- Federal prosecutors charged members and associates of the Gambino organized-crime family with a racketeering pattern involving extortion and related offenses.
- After a jury trial in the Eastern District of New York, defendants including Peter Gotti, Richard G. Gotti, Anthony (“Sonny”) Ciccone, and Richard Bondi were convicted of RICO conspiracy/substantive counts and multiple Hobbs Act extortion and extortion-conspiracy counts.
- The extortion schemes targeted labor unions and officials, union benefit funds/health plans, union members, and business owners in various industries.
- The prosecution theory included extortion of intangible economic interests, such as control over business decisions, contract relationships, work opportunities, and labor-related revenue streams.
- Defendants argued that Supreme Court authority required vacatur of Hobbs Act convictions premised on intangible property rights.
- Defendants appealed their convictions and sentences; the government cross-appealed certain sentencing determinations.

## Issues

1. Whether Hobbs Act extortion can be based on intangible property rights after Supreme Court precedent interpreting the statute’s “obtaining” element.
2. Whether the challenged extortion counts proved defendants “obtained” (or sought to obtain) the victims’ property, rather than merely depriving victims of its use.
3. Whether defendants were entitled to reversal based on additional claims involving sufficiency of evidence, trial rulings, jury instructions, and sentencing error under the post-*Booker* framework.

## Decision

- The Second Circuit affirmed the convictions, rejecting defendants’ challenges to liability on the RICO and Hobbs Act counts.
- The court held that Hobbs Act extortion is not limited to tangible property; intangible property may qualify if the defendant sought to obtain it.
- The court concluded the challenged extortion counts satisfied the “obtaining” requirement because the schemes sought to appropriate economic control and benefits for the defendants.
- The court remanded only Ciccone’s and Bondi’s cases for resentencing under the advisory Guidelines regime; other sentences were left undisturbed.

## Legal Principles

- Hobbs Act extortion requires proof that the defendant obtained, or attempted to obtain, property from the victim; mere interference with, or deprivation of, the victim’s property rights is insufficient.
- The “obtaining” requirement focuses on appropriation of a property interest by the defendant and applies the same way to tangible and intangible property.
- Intangible economic and contractual interests (e.g., control over business decisions, labor opportunities, contract terms, and revenue streams) can constitute “property” under the Hobbs Act when the defendant seeks to exercise or transfer those interests to himself through wrongful force, violence, or fear.
- Supreme Court precedent interpreting the Hobbs Act was read to clarify the “obtaining” element, not to categorically exclude intangible property from the statute’s coverage.

## Conclusion

The Second Circuit sustained organized-crime extortion convictions by holding that Hobbs Act extortion may rest on intangible property rights so long as the evidence shows defendants sought to obtain and exercise those rights, and it ordered only a limited resentencing remand for two defendants under the post-*Booker* sentencing framework.


United States v. Gotti, 459 F.3d 296 (2d Cir. 2006)