Organized Crime Defense Lawyer in New Jersey and Pennsylvania

An organized crime defense lawyer is the person you call when the government stops treating a case as a single alleged offense and starts treating it as an enterprise. Racketeering prosecutions, whether brought under the federal RICO statute, the New Jersey racketeering statute, or the Pennsylvania Corrupt Organizations statute, allow the government to combine separate alleged acts into one case, name multiple defendants in one indictment, and pursue forfeiture of property alongside criminal penalties. Ratliff Jackson LLP defends individuals and business owners in these prosecutions in New Jersey and Pennsylvania state courts and in federal court.

These cases are built differently from ordinary criminal cases. They often begin long before an arrest, with grand jury subpoenas, wiretaps, financial records requests, and cooperating witnesses. Understanding how the statutes actually work, and what the government must prove, is the starting point of any defense.

What Prosecutors Must Prove in a Racketeering Case

Racketeering statutes at both the federal and state level are built around two core concepts: an enterprise and a pattern of racketeering activity. An enterprise can be a formal entity such as a corporation or partnership, or a group of individuals associated in fact even without any legal structure. A pattern requires more than one criminal act. Under federal law, 18 U.S.C. § 1961(5) requires at least two acts of racketeering activity, with the last occurring within ten years of a prior act, excluding any period of imprisonment.

The United States Supreme Court has held that two acts alone are not automatically enough. In H.J. Inc. v. Northwestern Bell Telephone Co., 492 U.S. 229 (1989), the Court explained that the predicate acts must be related to one another and must amount to, or pose a threat of, continued criminal activity. This relatedness and continuity requirement is a frequent battleground in racketeering litigation, because the government often attempts to stitch together conduct that is neither related nor continuous.

The predicate offenses that can support a racketeering charge are listed in the statutes themselves and include offenses such as bribery, extortion, fraud, money laundering, gambling offenses, and controlled substance offenses. Which predicates the government alleges, and whether it can actually prove each one, shapes the entire case.

Federal RICO Charges: 18 U.S.C. §§ 1961 through 1968

The federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act prohibits four categories of conduct under 18 U.S.C. § 1962: investing income derived from a pattern of racketeering activity in an enterprise, acquiring or maintaining an interest in an enterprise through a pattern of racketeering activity, conducting or participating in the affairs of an enterprise through a pattern of racketeering activity, and conspiring to do any of these things.

The penalties are set out in 18 U.S.C. § 1963. A conviction carries imprisonment of up to 20 years, or up to life if the violation is based on a racketeering activity for which the maximum penalty includes life imprisonment. Section 1963 also mandates criminal forfeiture: the court must order forfeiture of any interest acquired or maintained in violation of the statute, any interest in or claim against the enterprise, and any property constituting or derived from racketeering proceeds. Under the relation-back principle in § 1963(c), the government's interest in forfeitable property vests at the moment of the act giving rise to forfeiture, which is why federal prosecutors can move against assets early in a case.

Federal RICO cases are typically investigated by agencies such as the FBI, DEA, and IRS, often over an extended period, and frequently involve wiretap evidence, financial analysis, and cooperating witnesses whose testimony is exchanged for sentencing consideration.

New Jersey Racketeering: N.J.S.A. 2C:41-1 to 2C:41-6.2

New Jersey has its own racketeering statute, modeled on federal RICO but with distinct definitions and grading. Under N.J.S.A. 2C:41-2, it is unlawful to use racketeering income to acquire an interest in an enterprise, to acquire or maintain an interest in or control of an enterprise through a pattern of racketeering activity, to conduct or participate in the affairs of an enterprise through a pattern of racketeering activity, or to conspire to do so.

A pattern under New Jersey law requires at least two incidents of racketeering conduct, the last occurring within ten years of a prior incident, and the incidents must embrace criminal conduct with the same or similar purposes, results, participants, victims, or methods of commission, or be otherwise interrelated by distinguishing characteristics rather than isolated incidents.

Grading is governed by N.J.S.A. 2C:41-3. Racketeering is ordinarily a crime of the second degree, which carries a term of five to ten years. It becomes a crime of the first degree, carrying ten to twenty years, when the violation involves a crime of violence, the use of firearms, or a crime of the first degree. New Jersey law also authorizes forfeiture and civil remedies in connection with racketeering violations.

Pennsylvania Corrupt Organizations: 18 Pa.C.S. § 911

Pennsylvania prosecutes enterprise crime under its Corrupt Organizations statute, 18 Pa.C.S. § 911. Like its federal counterpart, § 911(b) prohibits investing racketeering income in an enterprise, acquiring or maintaining an interest in an enterprise through a pattern of racketeering activity, conducting or participating in the affairs of an enterprise through a pattern of racketeering activity, and conspiracy to violate any of those provisions.

Under § 911(h), a pattern of racketeering activity refers to a course of conduct requiring two or more acts of racketeering activity, and an enterprise is defined broadly to include legitimate as well as illegitimate entities and governmental entities. A violation of § 911(b) is graded as a felony of the first degree under § 911(c), and the statute provides that a violation is deemed to continue so long as the person continues to receive any benefit from it, a provision with significant consequences for the statute of limitations.

Charges That Commonly Accompany Racketeering Counts

Racketeering counts rarely stand alone. Indictments in these cases typically layer additional charges that either serve as predicate acts or arise from the same investigation:

• Conspiracy: agreement-based liability that can reach individuals who never personally committed a predicate offense, making the scope of the alleged agreement a central defense issue.
• Money laundering: allegations that financial transactions were designed to conceal the source of funds, often built on bank records and transaction analysis.
• Fraud offenses: mail fraud, wire fraud, and securities-related charges frequently appear as predicates in federal indictments.
• Extortion and bribery: offenses involving threats, coercion, or improper influence, which can be charged under both state and federal law.
• Controlled substance offenses: distribution and trafficking allegations that the government uses to establish the enterprise's alleged purpose.
• Gambling and financial offenses: unlicensed gambling operations and related financial conduct listed among statutory predicates.

Because each predicate is itself a chargeable offense with its own elements, a racketeering defense involves testing the government's proof at two levels: each individual predicate, and the pattern and enterprise allegations that tie them together.

Asset Forfeiture and Property Consequences

Forfeiture is a defining feature of enterprise prosecutions. Under 18 U.S.C. § 1963, forfeiture upon a federal RICO conviction is mandatory, not discretionary, and reaches real property, tangible and intangible personal property, and substitute assets when directly forfeitable property cannot be located. Courts can also enter pretrial restraining orders affecting property while the case is pending. New Jersey and Pennsylvania law likewise provide forfeiture mechanisms connected to racketeering and corrupt organizations violations.

For business owners, this means an indictment can affect bank accounts, business operations, and real estate before any finding of guilt. Contesting restraints and forfeiture allegations is a distinct workstream within the defense, with its own procedures and deadlines, including ancillary proceedings for third parties who claim an interest in restrained property.

How the Defense of an Enterprise Case Proceeds

Every case turns on its own facts, but the structure of racketeering statutes creates recurring lines of defense work:

• Challenging the pattern: testing whether the alleged acts are actually related and continuous as the law requires, or whether the government has grouped unconnected conduct.
• Challenging the enterprise: examining whether the alleged association had the structure, continuity, and common purpose the statutes require, or whether ordinary business relationships have been recast as a criminal organization.
• Suppression litigation: wiretaps, searches, and electronic surveillance in these cases must comply with constitutional and statutory requirements, and evidence obtained in violation of those requirements can be challenged.
• Confronting cooperator testimony: cases built on witnesses who are testifying under plea agreements raise credibility and bias issues that must be developed through investigation and cross-examination.
• Litigating each predicate: defeating individual predicate acts can undermine the pattern allegation that holds the racketeering count together.
• Forfeiture defense: contesting the connection between specific property and the alleged offense conduct.

If You Are Under Investigation

Many people first learn of an enterprise investigation through a grand jury subpoena, a target letter, a search warrant, or an approach by agents. What happens in this stage matters. Statements made without counsel can be used later, and document productions and interviews carry legal consequences that are difficult to undo.

If you have been contacted by law enforcement, subpoenaed, or made aware that you or your business is under investigation, speak with an attorney before responding. Counsel can communicate with the government on your behalf, assess your exposure, protect privileged material, and in some circumstances address the government's concerns before charges are filed.

Frequently Asked Questions

Related Practice Areas

Resources

Speak With an Organized Crime Defense Lawyer

Enterprise prosecutions move on the government's timeline, and the earliest stages of a case, before indictment, are often where the most important decisions are made. If you have been charged, subpoenaed, or contacted by investigators in New Jersey or Pennsylvania, Ratliff Jackson LLP is available to discuss your situation confidentially.