Title 18 Offenses (18 USC 1952 - 18 USC 2113)

[153] Interstate and Foreign Travel or Transportation in Aid of Racketeering Enterprises--Elements

(18 USC 1952) 

FORECITE National™ Materials Related To This Instruction:

To sustain the charge of interstate or foreign [travel; transportation] in aid of racketeering enterprises, the government must prove the following propositions:

First, the defendant traveled or caused another to travel in interstate or foreign commerce, or used or caused to be used a facility in interstate or foreign commerce, including the mail;

Second, the defendant did so with the intent to [distribute the proceeds of an unlawful activity; commit a crime of violence to further unlawful activity; promote, manage, establish, carry on an unlawful activity; facilitate the promotion, management, establishment or carrying on of an unlawful activity]; and,

Third, thereafter the defendant did [distribute or attempt to distribute the proceeds of an unlawful activity; commit or attempt to commit a crime of violence to further unlawful activity; promote, manage, establish, carry on an unlawful activity; attempt to promote, manage, establish, carry on an unlawful activity; facilitate the promotion, management, establishment, or carrying on of an unlawful activity; attempt to facilitate the promotion, management, or carrying on of an unlawful activity].

If you find from your consideration of all the evidence that each of these propositions has been proved beyond a reasonable doubt, then you should find the defendant guilty.

If, on the other hand, you find from your consideration of all the evidence that any of these propositions has not been proved beyond a reasonable doubt, then you should find the defendant not guilty.

(18 USC 1952)

 [154] Interstate Commerce--Definition

FORECITE National™ Materials Related To This Instruction:

The term "interstate commerce" means travel between one state and another state or use of an interstate facility, including the mail.

The [interstate travel; use of an interstate facility] must relate significantly to the illegal activity charged in the indictment; that is, the relationship must be more than minimal or incidental.

The [interstate travel; use of an interstate facility], however, need not be essential to the success of such illegal activity.

The defendant need not have contemplated or knowingly caused the [interstate travel; use of an interstate facility].

Committee Comment

[155] Definition of Unlawful Activity--Business Enterprise

(18 USC 1952)  

FORECITE National™ Materials Related To This Instruction:

"Unlawful activity" means any business enterprise involving [gambling; liquor on which the federal excise tax has not been paid; narcotics or controlled substance; prostitution], in violation of the laws of the state in which they are committed or of the United States.

OR

"Unlawful activity" means [extortion; bribery; arson], in violation of the laws of the state in which it is committed or of the United States.

Committee Comment

[156] Definition of Unlawful Business Activity--Controlled Substances

(18 USC 1952) 

FORECITE National™ Materials Related To This Instruction:

I instruct you that (specify) is a controlled substance.

Committee Comment

[157] Money Laundering--Promoting Unlawful Activity

(18 USC 1956 (a)(1)(A)(i))  

FORECITE National™ Materials Related To This Instruction:

To sustain the charge of money laundering as charged in Count ___ of the indictment, the government must prove the following propositions:

First, the defendant knowingly conducted or attempted to conduct a financial transaction;

Second, the property involved in the financial transaction in fact involved the proceeds of [name of specified unlawful activity]; and

Third, the defendant knew that the property involved in the financial transaction represented the proceeds of some form of unlawful activity;

Fourth, the defendant engaged in the financial transaction with the intent to promote the carrying on of [name of specified unlawful activity].

If you find from your consideration of all the evidence that each of these propositions has been proved beyond a reasonable doubt then your should find the defendant guilty.

If, on the other hand, you find from your consideration of all the evidence that any one of these propositions has not been proved beyond a reasonable doubt, then you should find the defendant not guilty.

[158] Money Laundering--Tax Violations

(18 USC 1956 (a)(1)(A)(ii))  

FORECITE National™ Materials Related To This Instruction:

To sustain the charge of money laundering as charged in Count ___ of the indictment, the government must prove the following propositions:

First, the defendant knowingly conducted or attempted to conduct a financial transaction;

Second, the property involved in the financial transaction in fact involved the proceeds of [name of specified unlawful activity]; and

Third, the defendant knew that the property involved in the financial transaction represented the proceeds of some form of unlawful activity;

Fourth, the defendant engaged in the financial transaction with the intent to engage in [tax evasion; willfully making or subscribing false statements on a tax, return, document or statement made under penalty of perjury].

If you find from your consideration of all the evidence that each of these propositions has been proved beyond a reasonable doubt then your should find the defendant guilty.

If, on the other hand, you find from your consideration of all the evidence that any one of these propositions has not been proved beyond a reasonable doubt, then you should find the defendant not guilty.

Committee Comment

[159] Money Laundering--Concealing or Disguising

(18 USC 1956 (a)(1)(B)(i)) 

FORECITE National™ Materials Related To This Instruction:

To sustain the charge of money laundering as charged in Count ___ of the indictment, the government must prove the following propositions:

First, the defendant knowingly conducted or attempted to conduct a financial transaction;

Second, the property involved in the financial transaction in fact involved the proceeds of [name of specified unlawful activity]; and

Third, the defendant knew that the property involved in the financial transaction represented the proceeds of some form of unlawful activity;

Fourth, the defendant knew that the transaction was designed in whole or in part to conceal or disguise the nature, the location, the source, the ownership, or the control of the proceeds of [name of specified unlawful activity].

If you find from your consideration of all the evidence that each of these propositions has been proved beyond a reasonable doubt then your should find the defendant guilty.

If, on the other hand, you find from your consideration of all the evidence that any one of these propositions has not been proved beyond a reasonable doubt, then you should find the defendant not guilty.

[160] Money Laundering--Avoiding Reporting

(18 USC 1956 (a)(1)(B)(ii) 

FORECITE National™ Materials Related To This Instruction:

To sustain the charge of money laundering as charged in Count ___ of the indictment, the government must prove the following propositions:

First, the defendant knowingly conducted or attempted to conduct a financial transaction;

Second, the property involved in the financial transaction in fact involved the proceeds of [name of specified unlawful activity]; and

Third, the defendant knew that the property involved in the financial transaction represented the proceeds of some form of unlawful activity;

Fourth, the defendant knew that the transaction was designed in whole or in part to avoid [a transaction reporting requirement under state or federal law.] [the filing of a Currency Transaction Report Form 4789.]

If you find from your consideration of all the evidence that each of these propositions has been proved beyond a reasonable doubt then you should find the defendant guilty.

If, on the other hand, you find from your consideration of all the evidence that any one of these propositions has not been proved beyond a reasonable doubt, then you should find the defendant not guilty.

Committee Comment

 [161] Definition of "Financial Transaction"

(18 USC 1956)

FORECITE National™ Materials Related To This Instruction:

[The term "financial transaction" means a purchase, sale, transfer, delivery, or other disposition involving one or more monetary instruments, which in any way or degree affects interstate [or foreign] commerce.]

[The term "financial transaction" means a deposit, withdrawal, transfer between accounts, exchange of currency, loan, extension of credit, purchase or sale of any stock, bond, certificate of deposit, or use of a safe deposit box involving the use of a financial institution which is engaged in or the activities of which affect interstate [or foreign] commerce.]

[The term "monetary instruments" includes coin or currency of the United States, personal checks, bank checks, and money orders.]

[The term "financial institution" includes, for example, commercial banks, trust companies, businesses engaged in vehicle sales including automobile sales, and businesses and persons engaged in real estate closings and settlements.]

"Interstate commerce" means trade, transactions, transportation or communication between any point in a state and any place outside that state, or between two points within a state through a place outside the state. "Foreign commerce" means trade, transactions, transportation, or communication between a point in one country and a place outside that country, or between two points within a country through a place outside that country.

When [a financial institution][a business][an individual] in [name the state] is engaged in commerce outside of that state, or when [a financial institution][a business][an individual] in [name of state] purchases goods or services which come from outside that state, then the activities of that [financial institution][business][individual] affect interstate commerce.

[The government must prove that the foreseeable consequences of the defendant’s acts would be to affect interstate or foreign commerce. It is not necessary for you to find that the defendant knew or intended that the defendant’s actions would affect interstate or foreign commerce.]

Committee Comment

 [162] Knowledge

(18 USC 1956)

FORECITE National™ Materials Related To This Instruction:

The government must prove that the defendant knew that the property represented the proceeds of some form of activity that constitutes a felony under State or Federal law.

The government is not required to prove that the defendant knew that the property involved in the transaction represented the proceeds of [fill in specified unlawful activity].

[163] Unlawful Monetary Transactions--Elements

(18 USC 1957) 

FORECITE National™ Materials Related To This Instruction:

To sustain the charge of money laundering as charged in count ___ of the indictment, the government must prove the following propositions:

First, the defendant engaged or attempted to engage in a monetary transaction;

Second, that defendant knew the transaction involved criminally derived property;

Third, the property had a value greater than $10,000;

Fourth, the property was derived from [name of specified unlawful activity] and

Fifth, the transaction occurred in the [United States]

If you find from your consideration of all the evidence that each of these propositions has been proved beyond a reasonable doubt then you should find the defendant guilty.

If, on the other hand, you find from your consideration of all the evidence that any one of these propositions has not proved beyond a reasonable doubt, then you should find the defendant not guilty.

Committee Comment

[164] Definition of "Criminally Derived Property"

(18 USC 1957) 

FORECITE National™ Materials Related To This Instruction:

The term "criminally derived property" means any property constituting, or derived from, proceeds obtained from a criminal offense.

 [165] Definition of "Monetary Transaction" and "Interstate Commerce"

(18 USC 1957)

FORECITE National™ Materials Related To This Instruction:

The term "monetary transaction" means the deposit, withdrawal, transfer or exchange, in or affecting interstate commerce, of funds or a monetary instrument, by, through, or to a financial institution.

"Interstate commerce" means trade, transactions, transportation or communication between any point in a state and any place outside that state or between two points within a state through a place outside the state.

The term "financial institution" includes [commercial banks, trust companies, businesses engaged in vehicle sales including automobile sales, and businesses and persons engaged in real estate closings or settlements.]

Committee Comment

[166] Knowledge

(18 USC 1957) 

FORECITE National™ Materials Related To This Instruction:

The government must prove that the defendant knew that the property represented the proceeds of some form of activity that constitutes a felony under State or Federal law.

The government is not required to prove that the defendant knew that the property involved in the transaction represented the proceeds of [fill in specified unlawful activity].

[167] Substantive Racketeering--Elements

(18 USC 1962(c)) 

FORECITE National™ Materials Related To This Instruction:

To prove the [a] defendant guilty of racketeering, as charged in Count ___, the government must prove the following propositions:

First, that [insert name] was an enterprise;

Second, that the defendant was associated with [or employed by] the enterprise;

Third, that the defendant knowingly conducted or participated in the conduct of the affairs of [insert name] through a pattern of racketeering activity as described in Count ___; and

Fourth, that the activities of [insert name] affected interstate commerce.

[Fifth, that the commission of at least one of the racketeering acts described in Count ___ occurred on or after {five years prior to the return of the indictment}.]

If you find from your consideration of all the evidence that each of these propositions has been proved beyond a reasonable doubt as to the [a] defendant, you should find the [that] defendant guilty of Count ___.

If, on the other hand, you find from your consideration of all the evidence that any of these propositions has not been proved beyond a reasonable doubt as to the [a] defendant, then you should find the [that] defendant not guilty of Count ___.

[168] Pattern Requirement--Substantive Racketeering

(18 USC 1962(c)) 

FORECITE National™ Materials Related To This Instruction:

In order to find a "pattern of racketeering activity" for purposes of Count ___, you must find beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant committed [or caused another person to commit] at least two racketeering acts described in Count ___, and that those acts were in some way related to each other and that there was continuity between them[, and that they were separate acts]. Although a pattern of racketeering activity must consist of two or more acts, deciding that two such acts were committed, by itself, may not be enough for you to find that a pattern exists.

Acts are related to each other if they are not isolated events, that is, if they have similar purposes, or results, or participants, or victims, or are committed a similar way[, or have other similar distinguishing characteristics] [or are part of the affairs of the same enterprise].

There is continuity between acts if, for example, they are ongoing over a substantial period, or if they are part of the regular way some entity does business or conducts its affairs.

The government need not prove that all the acts described in Count ___ were committed, but you must unanimously agree as to which two or more racketeering acts the defendant committed [or caused to be committed] in order to find the defendant guilty of that count.

 [169] Racketeering Conspiracy--Elements

(18 USC 1962(d))

FORECITE National™ Materials Related To This Instruction:

To prove the [a] defendant guilty of conspiracy to commit racketeering, as charged in Count ___, the government must prove the following propositions:

First, that the defendant knowingly conspired to conduct or participate in the conduct of the affairs of [insert name], an enterprise, through a pattern of racketeering activity as described in Count ___; and

Second, that [insert name] [was][would be] an enterprise,

Third, that the activities of [insert name] would affect interstate commerce.

If you find from your consideration of all the evidence that each of these propositions has been proved beyond a reasonable doubt as to the [a] defendant, then you should find the [that] defendant guilty of Count ___.

If, on the other hand, you find from your consideration of all the evidence that any of these propositions has not been proved beyond a reasonable doubt as to the [a] defendant, then you should find the [that] defendant not guilty of Count ___.

Committee Comment

[170] Pattern Requirement--Racketeering Conspiracy

(18 USC 1962(d)) 

FORECITE National™ Materials Related To This Instruction:

In order to find a "pattern of racketeering activity" for purposes of Count ___, you must find beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant agreed that some member[s] of the conspiracy would commit at least two acts of racketeering as described in Count ___ [, and that they were separate acts]. You must also find that those acts were in some way related to each other and that there was continuity between them.

Acts are related to each other if they are not isolated events, that is, if they have similar purposes, or results, or participants, or victims, or are committed a similar way[, or have other similar distinguishing characteristics] [or are part of the affairs of the same enterprise].

There is continuity between acts if, for example, they are ongoing over a substantial period of time, or had the potential to continue over a substantial period, or if they are part of the regular way some entity does business or conducts its affairs.

For purposes of Count ___, the government does not have to prove that any racketeering acts were actually committed at all, or that the defendant agreed to personally commit any such acts, or that the defendant agreed that two or more specific acts would be committed.

Committee Comment

 [171] Enterprise --Legal Entity

(18 USC 1961(4))

FORECITE National™ Materials Related To This Instruction:

The term "enterprise" includes a[n] [type of entity].

Committee Comment

 [172] Enterprise--Association in Fact

(18 USC 1961(4))

FORECITE National™ Materials Related To This Instruction:

The term "enterprise" can include a group of people [or legal entities] associated together for a common purpose of engaging in a course of conduct. This group may be associated together for purposes that are both legal and illegal.

In considering whether a group is an "enterprise," you should consider whether it has an ongoing organization or structure, either formal or informal, and whether the various members of the group functioned as a continuing unit. [A group may continue to be an "enterprise" even if it changes membership by gaining or losing members over time.]

The government must prove that the group described in the indictment was the "enterprise" charged, but need not prove each and every allegation in the indictment about the enterprise or the manner in which the enterprise operated. The government must prove the association had some form or structure beyond the minimum necessary to conduct the charged pattern of racketeering.

Committee Comment

 [173] Conduct--Definition

(18 USC 1962(c&d))

FORECITE National™ Materials Related To This Instruction:

A person conducts or participates in the conduct of the affairs of an enterprise if that person uses his/her position in, or association with, the enterprise to perform acts which are involved in some way in the operation or management of the enterprise, directly or indirectly, or if the person causes another to do so.

In order to have conducted or participated in the conduct of the affairs of an enterprise, a person need not have participated in all the activity alleged in [the RICO counts].

[174] Associate--Definition

(18 USC 1962(c&d)) 

FORECITE National™ Materials Related To This Instruction:

To be associated with an enterprise, a person must be involved with the enterprise in a way that is related to its affairs [or common purpose] [, although the person [need not have a stake in the goals of the enterprise [and] [may even act in a way that subverts those goals]]. A person may be associated with an enterprise without being so throughout its existence.

 [175] Sub-Parts of Racketeering Acts

(18 USC 1962(c))

FORECITE National™ Materials Related To This Instruction:

Each of the racketeering acts described in [the substantive RICO count] is numbered and [some] consist[s] of multiple offenses set out in separate, lettered sub-paragraphs [(a), (b), (c), (d), etc]. To prove that a defendant committed a particular "racketeering act" that is made up of multiple offenses, it is sufficient if the government proves beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant committed at least one of the offenses identified in the sub-paragraphs of that racketeering act. However, you must unanimously agree upon which of the different offenses alleged within a racketeering act the defendant committed.

Committee Comment

[176] Interstate Commerce--Definition

(18 USC 1962) 

FORECITE National™ Materials Related To This Instruction:

Interstate commerce includes the movement of money, goods, services or persons from one state to another [or between another country and the United States]. This would include the purchase or sale of goods or supplies from outside [the state[s] in which the enterprise was located], the use of interstate mail or wire facilities, or the causing of any of those things. If you find that beyond a reasonable doubt either (a) that [the enterprise] made, purchased, sold or moved goods or services that had their origin or destination outside [the state[s] in which the enterprise was located], or (b) that the actions of [the enterprise] affected in any degree the movement of money, goods or services across state lines, then interstate commerce was engaged in or affected.

The government need only prove that [the enterprise] as a whole engaged in interstate commerce or that its activity affected interstate commerce to any degree, although proof that racketeering acts did affect interstate commerce meets that requirement. The government need not prove that the [a] defendant engaged in interstate commerce, or that the acts of the [a] defendant affected interstate commerce.

[177] Bank Robbery--Elements

(18 USC2113) 

FORECITE National™ Materials Related To This Instruction:

To sustain the charge of bank robbery, the government must prove the following propositions:

First, the defendant [took; attempted to take] from the person or presence of another [money; property; specific thing of value] belonging to or in the care, custody, control, management or possession of (here name bank, savings and loan, or credit union named in the indictment);

Second, at the time charged in the indictment the (here name bank, savings and loan, or credit union named in the indictment) had its deposits insured by the [Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation; Federal Savings & Loan Insurance Corporation; National Credit Union Administration); and

Third, the defendant acted to take such [money; property; specific thing of value] by force and violence, or by intimidation.

If you find from your consideration of all the evidence that each of these propositions has been proved beyond a reasonable doubt, then you should find the defendant guilty.

If, on the other hand, you find from your consideration of all the evidence that any of these propositions has not been proved beyond a reasonable doubt, then you should find the defendant not guilty.

Committee Comment

[178] Intimidation

(18 USC 2113) 

FORECITE National™ Materials Related To This Instruction:

Intimidation means to say or do something in such a way as would place a reasonable person in fear.

Committee Comment

[179] Entering to Commit Bank Robbery or Another Felony--Elements

(18 USC 2113) 

FORECITE National™ Materials Related To This Instruction:

To sustain the charge of entering to commit bank robbery or another felony, the government must prove the following propositions:

First, the defendant [entered; attempted to enter] the [bank; savings and loan; credit union; building] used in whole or part as [bank; savings and loan; credit union];

Second, at the time charged in the indictment the defendant [entered; attempted to enter] the [bank; savings and loan; credit union; building] used in whole or part as [bank; savings and loan; credit union] with the intent to commit a felony or any larceny affecting such [bank; savings and loan; credit union; building]; and,

Third, the (here name bank, savings and loan, credit union, or building named in the indictment) had its deposits insured by the [Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation; Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation; National Credit Union Administration].

If you find from your consideration of all the evidence that each of these propositions has been proved beyond a reasonable doubt, then you should find the defendant guilty.

If, on the other hand, you find from your consideration of all the evidence that any of these propositions has not been proved beyond a reasonable doubt, then you should find the defendant not guilty.

Committee Comment

 [180] Bank Theft--Elements

(18 USC 2113)

FORECITE National™ Materials Related To This Instruction:

To sustain the charge of bank theft, the government must prove the following propositions:

First, the defendant took and carried away [property; money; something of value] belonging to or in the [care; custody; control; management] of (here name bank, credit union, savings and loan named in the indictment);

Second, at the time the (here name bank, credit union, or savings and loan named in the indictment) had its deposits insured by the [Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation; Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation; National Credit Union Administration];

Third, the defendant took and carried away such [property; money; thing of value] with the intent to steal; and,

Fourth, such [money; property; thing of value] [exceeded; did not exceed] $100.00 in value.

If you find from your consideration of all the evidence that each of these propositions has been proved beyond a reasonable doubt, then you should find the defendant guilty.

If, on the other hand, you find from your consideration of all the evidence that any of these propositions has not been proved beyond a reasonable doubt, then you should find the defendant not guilty.

Committee Comment

[181] Definition of Steal

(18 USC 2113) 

FORECITE National™ Materials Related To This Instruction:

The term steal as used in these instructions means to take with the intent to deprive the owner of the rights and benefits of ownership.

Committee Comment

[182] Possession of Stolen Bank Money or Property--Elements

(18 USC 2113) 

FORECITE National™ Materials Related To This Instruction:

To sustain the charge of possession of stolen bank money or property, the government must prove the following propositions:

First, the defendant [received; possessed; concealed; stored; bartered; sold; disposed of] [property; money; a thing of value] having a value [of $100.00 or less; in excess of $100.00];

Second, the [property; money; thing of value] was taken from (here name bank, savings and loan, credit union, described in the indictment);

Third, at the time charged in the indictment the [bank; savings and loan; credit union] had its deposits insured by the [Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation; Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation; National Credit Union Administration]; and

Fourth, the defendant knew that the [money; property; thing of value] was stolen at the time he [possessed; received; concealed; stored; bartered; sold; disposed] of it.

If you find from your consideration of all the evidence that each of these propositions has been proved beyond a reasonable doubt, then you should find the defendant guilty.

If, on the other hand, you find from your consideration of all the evidence that any of these propositions has not been proved beyond a reasonable doubt, then you should find the defendant not guilty.

Committee Comment

 [183] Aggravated Bank Robbery--Elements

(18 USC 2113)

FORECITE National™ Materials Related To This Instruction:

To sustain the charge of aggravated bank robbery, the government must prove the following propositions:

First, the defendant took or attempted to take, from the person or presence of another [money; property; a thing of value] belonging to or in the [care; custody; control; management, possession] of (here name bank, savings and loan, credit union, named in the indictment);

Second, at the time charged in the indictment the [bank; savings and loan; credit union] had its deposits insured by the [Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation; Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation; National Credit Union Administration];

Third, the defendant took or attempted to take such [money; property; thing of value] by means of force and violence, or by means of intimidation; and

Fourth, the defendant assaulted or put in jeopardy the life of (here name person(s) named in the indictment) by the use of a dangerous weapon or device, while committing or attempting to commit the theft or burglary.

If you find from your consideration of all the evidence that each of these propositions has been proved beyond a reasonable doubt, then you should find the defendant guilty.

If, on the other hand, you find from your consideration of all the evidence that any of these propositions has not been proved beyond a reasonable doubt, then you should find the defendant not guilty.

Committee Comment

[184] Put in Jeopardy the Life of Another Person

(18 USC 2113(d)) 

FORECITE National™ Materials Related To This Instruction:

The phrase "put in jeopardy the life of any person" as used in these instructions means to knowingly do an act which exposes another person to risk of death. In considering this element, you must focus on the actual risk of death created by the use of the dangerous weapon or device. This risk might include direct risk to bank employees and indirect risk through a violent response by a customer or the police.

Committee Comment

[185] Kidnaping or Murder During a Bank Robbery--Elements

(18 USC 2113) 

FORECITE National™ Materials Related To This Instruction:

To sustain the charge of [kidnaping; murder] during a bank robbery, the government must prove the following propositions:

First, the defendant [killed (specify person(s) named in the indictment); forced (specify person(s) named in the indictment) to accompany the defendant without the consent of (specify person(s) named in the indictment)];

Second, the defendant performed such act or acts during the course of [committing any offense defined in 18 USC 2113; avoiding or attempting to avoid apprehension for the commission of such offense] [freeing himself or attempting to free himself from arrest or confinement for such offense]; and,

Third, at the time charged in the indictment, the [bank; savings and loan; credit union] had its deposits insured by the [Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation; Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation; National Credit Union Administration].

If you find from your consideration of all the evidence that each of these propositions has been proved beyond a reasonable doubt, then you should find the defendant guilty.

If, on the other hand, you find from your consideration of all the evidence that any of these propositions has not been proved beyond a reasonable doubt, then you should find the defendant not guilty.

Committee Comment