## Facts

- Federal prosecutors charged Frank Oreto, Sr., Frank Oreto, Jr., and Dennis Petrosino with operating a loansharking business in Revere, Massachusetts.
- The indictment charged RICO conspiracy and substantive RICO violations under 18 U.S.C. § 1962, and numerous extortionate credit transaction offenses under 18 U.S.C. §§ 892 and 894.
- The indictment was extensive, alleging dozens of extortionate lending and collection transactions and numerous usurious loans as predicate acts for the RICO counts.
- The government’s theory portrayed Oreto, Sr. as the leader, with Oreto, Jr. and Petrosino acting as collectors/enforcers who obtained payments and used threats or violence to support the enterprise’s lending.
- After a lengthy jury trial, all three defendants were convicted on the RICO counts and on multiple extortionate credit transaction counts (with additional related convictions for some defendants).
- During trial, allegations surfaced that some jurors had discussed the case prematurely; the district court investigated and gave curative instructions, but denied a mistrial/new trial.

## Issues

1. Whether alleged premature juror discussions required a mistrial or a new trial.
2. Whether Oreto, Jr. and Petrosino, as lower-level collectors/enforcers, could be convicted under RICO § 1962(c) as participants in the conduct of the enterprise’s affairs.
3. Whether the evidence was sufficient to prove the RICO counts and the extortionate credit transaction predicate acts as to each defendant.

## Decision

- The First Circuit affirmed the convictions and rejected all claims of reversible error.
- The court held the district judge acted within discretion in addressing alleged juror premature discussions and that the record did not show prejudice warranting a mistrial or new trial.
- The court held the evidence was sufficient to sustain the RICO conspiracy and substantive RICO convictions and the extortionate credit transaction convictions.
- Applying the operation-or-management standard, the court held RICO liability is not limited to leaders; lower-level participants may satisfy § 1962(c) when their conduct helps carry out the enterprise’s affairs.

## Legal Principles

- Under 18 U.S.C. § 1962(c), liability extends to persons “employed by or associated with” an enterprise who participate in the conduct of the enterprise’s affairs, consistent with the operation-or-management test.
- The operation-or-management test is not confined to upper management; participants on the “lower rung” may fall within § 1962(c) when they perform essential functions that help run the enterprise’s affairs under the direction of others.
- Claims of juror misconduct based on premature discussion are addressed primarily through the trial court’s inquiry and remedial measures; absent a clear abuse of discretion and a showing of prejudice, a mistrial or new trial is not required.
- On sufficiency review, the evidence is assessed in the light most favorable to the verdict, and credibility choices are for the jury.

## Conclusion

The First Circuit upheld RICO and extortionate credit transaction convictions arising from a loansharking enterprise, holding that RICO § 1962(c) can reach non-leader collectors/enforcers who help conduct the enterprise’s affairs, and that the trial court’s response to alleged premature juror discussions did not warrant a new trial.


United States v. Oreto, 37 F.3d 739 (1st Cir. 1994)