§
Subdivision 1.Crime.
A person is guilty of racketeering if the person:
(1) is employed by or associated with an enterprise and intentionally conducts or participates in the affairs of the enterprise by participating in a pattern of criminal activity;
(2) acquires or maintains an interest in or control of an enterprise, or an interest in real property, by participating in a pattern of criminal activity; or
(3) participates in a pattern of criminal activity and knowingly invests any proceeds derived from that conduct, or any proceeds derived from the investment or use of those proceeds, in an enterprise or in real property.
§
Subd. 2.Permitted activities.
For purposes of this section, it is not unlawful to:
(1) purchase securities on the open market with intent to make an investment, and without the intent of controlling or participating in the control of the issuer, or of assisting another to do so, if the securities of the issuer held by the purchaser, the members of the purchaser's immediate family, and the purchaser's accomplices in a pattern of criminal activity do not amount in the aggregate to five percent of the outstanding securities of any one class and do not confer, either in the law or in fact, the power to elect one or more directors of the issuer;
(2) make a deposit in an account maintained in a savings association, or a deposit in any other financial institution, that creates an ownership interest in that association or institution; or
(3) purchase nonvoting shares in a limited partnership, with intent to make an investment, and without the intent of controlling or participating in the control of the partnership.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
12
cases, 1993–2020 · leading case:
State v. Frazier, 649 N.W.2d 828 (Minn. 2002).
State v. Frazier, 649 N.W.2d 828 (Minn. 2002).
· cites it 8× “Minn.Stat. § 609.903, subd. 1. The RICO statute defines "enterprise" as: [A] sole proprietorship, partnership, corporation, trust, or other legal entity, or a union, governmental entity, association, or group of persons, associated in fact although not a legal entity, and…”
State v. Trong Kim Huynh, 519 N.W.2d 191 (Minn. 1994).
· cites it 16× “We affirm defendant's conviction for racketeering, and we also affirm the trial court's ranking the offense of racketeering at severity level VIII for sentencing purposes.”
State v. Trong Kim Huynh, 504 N.W.2d 477 (Minn. Ct. App. 1993).
· cites it 18× “*480 1(2), 2(2) (1990) and one count of racketeering in violation of Minn.Stat. §§ 609.903, subd. 1, .904, subd.”
State v. Pratt, 813 N.W.2d 868 (Minn. 2012).
· cites it 2× “2(4) (2010), and two counts of racketeering, pursuant to Minn.Stat. § 609.903, subd. 1 (2010). He was charged both as a principal and as an accomplice.”
State v. Wilson, 632 N.W.2d 225 (Minn. 2001).
· cites it 2× “Wilson was charged in Stearns County on March 30, 2000, with racketeering in violation of Minn.Stat. §§ 609.903, subd. 1(1), 609.904, subds.”
State v. Kujak, 639 N.W.2d 878 (Minn. Ct. App. 2002).
· cites it 3× “FACTS Appellant Scott Thomas Kujak was charged by indictment with racketeering in violation of Minn.Stat. § 609.903, subd. 1(1) (2000). The grand jury heard testimony stemming from a 30-day investigation of Kujak, during which his telephones and pager were intercepted.”
Keesling v. Beegle, 880 N.E.2d 1202 (Ind. 2008).
· cites it 2× “§ 16-14-4(b) (2007); Minn. Stat. Ann. § 609.903 (1) (2007); Miss.”
State v. Kelly, 519 N.W.2d 202 (Minn. 1994).
· cites it 4× “[4] The racketeering conviction was for violation of subdivision 1(1) of Minn.Stat. § 609.903 (1992) (a person is guilty of racketeering who "(1) is employed by or associated with an enterprise and intentionally conducts or participates in the affairs of the enterprise by…”
Fraction v. Minnesota, 678 F. Supp. 2d 908 (D. Minnesota 2008).
· cites it 2× “” Minn.Stat. § 609.903, subd. 1(1). An “enterprise” is characterized under Minnesota law by: “1) a common purpose among the individuals associated with the enterprise; where 2) the organization is ongoing and continuing, with its members functioning under some sort of…”
State v. Kelly, 504 N.W.2d 513 (Minn. Ct. App. 1993).
· cites it 6× “la, 2 (1988), and one count of racketeering in violation of Minn. Stat. § 609.903 , subd. 1(1) (1990).”
State v. Longo, 909 N.W.2d 599 (Minn. Ct. App. 2018).
· cites it 4× “" Minn. Stat. § 609.903 , subd. 1(3) (2014).”
Gustafson v. Bolin (D. Minnesota 2020).
“) 25 review of for Racketeering Minn. Stat. 609.903.” (Mot. for Assertion of Minn.”
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.