The Shellow Collection: Interstate Travel In Aid Of Racketeering (18 USC 1952(a)(3))

THE SHELLOW COLLECTION
Jury Instructions By James M. Shellow of Wisconsin
Go to Shellow Collection Table of Contents

Interstate Travel In Aid Of Racketeering (18 USC 1952(a)(3))

    1.    18 USC 1952(a)(3) Interstate Travel In Aid Of Racketeering: Elements
    2.    Prosecution Must Prove Defendant Caused Travel Or Was Motivating Factor For The Travel
    3.    Relationship Of Interstate Travel To Unlawful Activity Must Be More Significant Than Merely Incidental Or Minimal
    4.    "Unlawful Activity" Defined
    5.    Government Must Prove Business Enterprise Was Continuous

THE SHELLOW COLLECTION
Jury Instructions By James M. Shellow of Wisconsin

1. 18 USC 1952(a)(3) Interstate Travel In Aid Of Racketeering: Elements

ALERT: Carefully review the Caveats and Disclaimers before using these materials.

SAMPLE INSTRUCTION # 1:

    To sustain the charge of interstate or foreign travel in aid of racketeering enterprise, the government must prove the following propositions:

    First, the defendant traveled in interstate or foreign commerce;

    Second, the defendant did so with the intent to facilitate the promotion, management, establishment or carrying on of an unlawful activity; and

    Third, thereafter the defendant did attempt to promote, manage, establish, carry on an unlawful activity; or facilitate the promotion, management, establishment, or carrying on of an unlawful activity; or 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 one of these propositions has not been proved beyond a reasonable doubt, then you should find the defendant not guilty.

AUTHORITIES:

7th CIRCUIT FEDERAL INSTRUCTIONS 1999 No. 153 [formerly Federal Criminal Jury Instruction Committee, United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, 153 McGarr Subcommittee, Tentative Approval 12/16/83].

SAMPLE INSTRUCTION # 2:

    Title 18, United States Code, § 1952(a)(3), makes it a federal crime or offense for anyone to travel in interstate commerce for the purpose of carrying on certain unlawful activities.

    The defendant can be found guilty of that offense only if all of the following facts are proved beyond a reasonable doubt.

    First: that the defendant traveled in interstate commerce on or about the time, and between the places, charged in the indictment;

    Second: that the defendant engaged in that travel with the specific intent to promote, manage, establish or carry on an "unlawful activity," as hereafter defined; and

    Third: that the defendant thereafter knowingly and willfully committed an act to promote, manage, establish or carry on such "unlawful activity."

    The term "interstate commerce" means transportation or movement between one state and another state; and while it must be proved that the defendant traveled in interstate commerce with the specific intent to promote, manage, establish or carry on an "unlawful activity," it need not be proved that such purpose was the only reason or motive prompting defendant's travel.

    The term "unlawful activity" includes any "business enterprise" involving gambling offenses in violation of the laws of the state in which they are committed.

    To constitute a "business enterprise" it is not necessary that the alleged illegal activity be engaged in for any particular length of time, nor must it be proved that such activity constituted the primary pursuit or occupation of the defendant, or that it actually returned any profit. What must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt is that the defendant did engage in a continuous course of conduct or series of transactions for the purpose of profit, rather than casual, sporadic or isolated activity.

    The indictment charges that the defendant traveled in interstate commerce with the intent to promote, manage, establish and carry on an unlawful activity. However, the law is worded in the disjunctive, that is, the various modes or methods of violating the statute are separated by the word "or." So, if you find beyond a reasonable doubt that any one method or way of violating the law occurred, that is sufficient so long as you agree unanimously upon the particular way or method involved.

AUTHORITY:

Pattern Jury Instructions (Criminal) [for the Eleventh Circuit] (1985), No. OI 67 [formerly 48].

SAMPLE INSTRUCTION # 3:

    Title 18, United States Code, Section 1952 reads in part:

    Whoever travels in ... foreign commerce ... with intent to --

    Otherwise promote, manage, establish or carry on, or facilitate the promotion, management, establishment, or carrying on, of any unlawful activity, and thereafter performs or attempts to perform any ... act [to promote, manage, establish or carry on] any unlawful activity ... is guilty of an offense against the United States.

CASES WHERE THE ABOVE INSTRUCTION WAS GIVEN:

United States v. Brown, No. CR83-310(C)M (W.D. Wash. 1983).

SAMPLE INSTRUCTION # 4:

    In order to establish that defendant __________ (name of defendant) committed the offense of foreign travel in aid of racketeering, as charged in Count(s) ____ of the Superseding Indictment, the Government must prove beyond a reasonable doubt each of the following elements:

    FIRST: That on or about the dates alleged, the defendant aided, abetted, counseled, or commanded another to travel in foreign commerce, that is from one country to the United States;

    SECOND: That the travel was performed with specific intent to further the unlawful activity of __________ (type of unlawful activity e.g. importing and distributing heroin);

    THIRD: That after said travel the named defendant performed acts to facilitate the unlawful activity; and

    FOURTH: That defendant __________ (name of defendant) engaged in a continuous course of conduct regarding the unlawful activity between about __________ (date) and __________ (date).

CASES WHERE THE ABOVE INSTRUCTION WAS GIVEN:

United States v. Brown, No. CR83-310(C)M (W.D. Wash. 1983).

RELATED NCJIC MATERIALS:

See NCJIC Federal Model Instructions by Offense: 18 USC 1952: Interstate And Foreign Travel Or Transportation In Aid Of Racketeering Enterprises.

THE SHELLOW COLLECTION
Jury Instructions By James M. Shellow of Wisconsin

2. Prosecution Must Prove Defendant Caused Travel Or Was Motivating Factor For The Travel

ALERT: Carefully review the Caveats and Disclaimers before using these materials.

SAMPLE INSTRUCTION:

The government need not prove that a defendant actually traveled (himself/herself). The government need only show that the defendant caused such travel or was the motivating factor for the travel.

AUTHORITIES:

Federal Criminal Jury Instruction Committee, United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, McGarr Subcommittee, Tentative Approval 12/16/83.

RELATED NCJIC MATERIALS:

See NCJIC Federal Model Instructions by Offense: 18 USC 1952: Interstate And Foreign Travel Or Transportation In Aid Of Racketeering Enterprises.

THE SHELLOW COLLECTION
Jury Instructions By James M. Shellow of Wisconsin

3. Relationship Of Interstate Travel To Unlawful Activity Must Be More Significant Than Merely Incidental Or Minimal

ALERT: Carefully review the Caveats and Disclaimers before using these materials.

SAMPLE INSTRUCTION:

    The term "interstate commerce" means commerce between one state and another state.

    Travel in interstate commerce in furtherance of unlawful activity is an essential element of the offense. It is not necessary, however, that such use be contemplated at the time a course of unlawful conduct is commenced. It is sufficient to establish this element of the crime if the defendant travels in interstate commerce in order to facilitate or attempt to facilitate the unlawful activity.

    The relationship of the interstate travel, to the unlawful activity must be more significant than merely incidental or minimal. The government need not prove that the interstate travel was an essential part of the unlawful activity if the travel was of assistance in furtherance of the unlawful activity.

AUTHORITIES:

7th CIRCUIT FEDERAL INSTRUCTIONS 1999 No. 154 [formerly Federal Criminal Jury Instruction Committee, United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, McGarr Subcommittee, Held 12/16/83].

RELATED NCJIC MATERIALS:

See NCJIC Federal Model Instructions by Offense: 18 USC 1952: Interstate And Foreign Travel Or Transportation In Aid Of Racketeering Enterprises.

THE SHELLOW COLLECTION
Jury Instructions By James M. Shellow of Wisconsin

4. "Unlawful Activity" Defined

ALERT: Carefully review the Caveats and Disclaimers before using these materials.

SAMPLE INSTRUCTION:

You are instructed that the term "unlawful activity" means any business enterprise involving narcotics or controlled substances.

CASES WHERE THE ABOVE INSTRUCTION WAS GIVEN:

RELATED NCJIC MATERIALS:

See NCJIC Federal Model Instructions by Offense: 18 USC 1952: Interstate And Foreign Travel Or Transportation In Aid Of Racketeering Enterprises.

THE SHELLOW COLLECTION
Jury Instructions By James M. Shellow of Wisconsin

5. Government Must Prove Business Enterprise Was Continuous

ALERT: Carefully review the Caveats and Disclaimers before using these materials.

SAMPLE INSTRUCTION:

In order to convict a defendant of a violation of this section, the government need only prove that the business enterprise was continuous, and not that the interstate or foreign travel was continuous.

AUTHORITY:

United States v. Kaiser, 660 F.2d 724 (9th Cir. 1981).

RELATED NCJIC MATERIALS:

See NCJIC Federal Model Instructions by Offense: 18 USC 1952: Interstate And Foreign Travel Or Transportation In Aid Of Racketeering Enterprises.