La. R.S. » RS
Louisiana Revised Statutes & Codes

La. Rev. Stat. § 15:1353 (2026)

Prohibited activities

✓ laws through the 2025 Regular Session (checked Sept. 2026)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section LA-LEGlegis.la.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

§1353.  Prohibited activities

A.  It is unlawful for any person who has knowingly received any proceeds derived, directly or indirectly, from a pattern of racketeering activity to use or invest, whether directly or indirectly, any part of such proceeds, or the proceeds derived from the investment or use thereof, in the acquisition of any title to, or any right, interest, or equity in immovable property or in the establishment or operation of any enterprise.  

B.  It is unlawful for any person, through a pattern of racketeering activity, knowingly to acquire or maintain, directly or indirectly, any interest in or control of any enterprise or immovable property.  

C.  It is unlawful for any person employed by, or associated with, any enterprise knowingly to conduct or participate in, directly or indirectly, such enterprise through a pattern of racketeering activity.  

D.  It is unlawful for any person to conspire or attempt to violate any of the provisions of Subsections A, B, or C of this Section.  

Added by Acts 1983, No. 727, §1, eff. July 22, 1983; Acts 1992, No. 918, §1.  

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 33 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1988–2025 · leading case: State v. Sandifer, 249 So. 3d 142 (La. Ct. App. 2018).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Sandifer, 249 So. 3d 142 (La. Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 10× “It is unlawful for any person employed by, or associated with, any enterprise knowingly to conduct or participate in, directly or indirectly, such enterprise through a pattern of racketeering activity.”
State v. Sarrio, 803 So. 2d 212 (La. Ct. App. 2001). · cites it 4× “ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR NUMBER SEVEN By this assignment, defendant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence used to convict him.”
Ames v. Ohle, 97 So. 3d 386 (La. Ct. App. 2012). · cites it 2× “R.S. 15:1353; 2) unjust enrichment; 3) breach of fiduciary duty; 4) breach of contract; 5) fraud; 6) detrimental reliance; 7) negligent misrepresentation; and 8) civil conspiracy.”
Thomas v. North 40 Land Dev., Inc., 894 So. 2d 1160 (La. Ct. App. 2005). · cites it 2× “15:1356, the civil remedies provision of the statute; as a result, Section 1356 now provides: Any person who is injured by reason of any violation of the provisions of R.S. 15:1353 shall have a cause of action against any person engaged in a drug racketeering activity who…”
State v. Touchet, 759 So. 2d 194 (La. Ct. App. 2000). · cites it 7× “R.S. 15:1353. The bill of information alleged that Mr.”
State v. Hamilton, 572 So. 2d 269 (La. Ct. App. 1990). · cites it 5× “Robert Hamilton was charged by indictment with three counts of drug racketeering, in violation of LSA-R.S. 15:1353 A, B and D. He pled not guilty.”
State v. Esteen, 821 So. 2d 60 (La. Ct. App. 2002). “R.S. 15:1353), which was later dismissed.”
State v. Batchelor, 597 So. 2d 1132 (La. Ct. App. 1992). · cites it 3× “R.S. 15:1353. La.R.S. 15:1353 makes it a crime for one who has knowingly derived proceeds from a drug racketeering activity to use or invest the proceeds in the establishment or operation of any enterprise.”
State v. Nine Sav. Accounts, 553 So. 2d 823 (La. 1989). · cites it 4× “All property, immovable or movable, including money, used in the course of, intended for use in the course of, derived from, or realized through, conduct in violation of a provision of R.S. 15:1353 is subject to civil forfeiture to the state.”
State v. Decay, 798 So. 2d 1057 (La. Ct. App. 2001). “R.S. 15:1353. All of the charges arose from wiretapping evidence.”
State v. Graham, 820 So. 2d 1101 (La. Ct. App. 2002). “R.S. 15:1353. The bill of information contained eleven counts, but only count one, the charge of racketeering, and count five, the charge of possession of cocaine of over 400 grams, pertain to Graham and Jefferson.”
State v. Granado, 261 So. 3d 51 (La. Ct. App. 2018). “Defendant was exposed to a sentence of imprisonment at hard labor up to fifty years and/or a fine up to one million dollars. Instead, he received a sentence of a term above the midrange but less than the maximum possible term.”
Show all 33 citing cases →
La. Rev. Stat. § 15:1353(A): 1 case
State v. Redditt, 113 So. 3d 1075 (La. 2013).
La. Rev. Stat. § 15:1353(B): 3 cases
State v. Sarrio, 803 So. 2d 212 (La. Ct. App. 2001). “ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR NUMBER SEVEN By this assignment, defendant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence used to convict him.”
Skannal v. Jones, Odom, Davis & Politz, L.L.P., 195 So. 3d 33 (La. Ct. App. 2016).
State v. Redditt, 113 So. 3d 1075 (La. 2013).
La. Rev. Stat. § 15:1353(C): 5 cases
State v. Sandifer, 249 So. 3d 142 (La. Ct. App. 2018). “It is unlawful for any person employed by, or associated with, any enterprise knowingly to conduct or participate in, directly or indirectly, such enterprise through a pattern of racketeering activity.”
State v. Touchet, 759 So. 2d 194 (La. Ct. App. 2000). “R.S. 15:1353. The bill of information alleged that Mr.”
State v. Ficklen, 247 So. 3d 1075 (La. Ct. App. 2018).
State of Louisiana v. Kentrell Hickerson, 312 So. 3d 1124 (La. Ct. App. 2020).
State v. Redditt, 113 So. 3d 1075 (La. 2013).
La. Rev. Stat. § 15:1353(D): 5 cases
State v. Sandifer, 249 So. 3d 142 (La. Ct. App. 2018). “It is unlawful for any person employed by, or associated with, any enterprise knowingly to conduct or participate in, directly or indirectly, such enterprise through a pattern of racketeering activity.”
State v. Touchet, 759 So. 2d 194 (La. Ct. App. 2000). “R.S. 15:1353. The bill of information alleged that Mr.”
State v. Ficklen, 247 So. 3d 1075 (La. Ct. App. 2018).
State of Louisiana v. Kentrell Hickerson, 312 So. 3d 1124 (La. Ct. App. 2020).
State v. Redditt, 113 So. 3d 1075 (La. 2013).
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.