Abstract
This Article will examine RICO as it has been interpreted by the United States Courts of Appeals and the Supreme Court of the United States in an effort to determine the effects that merger and double jeopardy have had in the past, and should have in the future, upon RICO prosecutions. Because the doc- trines of merger and double jeopardy are criminal law principles, only the criminal aspects of RICO will be examined. Initially, this Article will explore the purpose and history of RICO and examine the doctrines of merger and double jeopardy and their application to RICO indictments and convictions. Additionally, the impact of double jeopardy on other complex statutory schemes will be reviewed both in conjunction with RICO indictments and as a predictor of possible RICO double jeopardy analysis. This Article will then focus on the disturbing trend of the Supreme Court to limit double jeopardy protection when Congress has approved multiple punishments and convictions. Finally, this Article will examine Grady v. Corbin, focusing on its dramatic expansion of double jeopardy protection and its potential to provide additional constitutional protection for RICO defendants.
Recommended Citation
Earle A. Partington, RICO, Merger, and Double Jeopardy, 15 SEATTLE U. L. REV. 1 (1991).
