Morgan v. State
117 So. 3d 79
Fla. Dist. Ct. App.2013Background
- Morgan appeals his RICO, conspiracy to violate RICO, and felon in possession of a firearm convictions in 05-CF-21005.
- The State linked Morgan to a narcotics ring through a 321 area-code number and Walton’s drug activities in East Tampa.
- Walton identified Morgan as his cocaine supplier; police arranged controlled calls to Morgan via the 321 number.
- Trial evidence tied Morgan to one alleged predicate act; no evidence showed Morgan’s knowledge of the conspiracy or a second predicate act.
- Record on appeal lacks a transcript of the contested audio recordings; recordings themselves were not admitted as evidence and are largely unintelligible.
- The court could not determine if the State proved RICO pattern or conspiracy elements due to the missing or incompletely preserved recordings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of predicate acts and knowledge for RICO/conspiracy | Morgan argues lack of two predicate acts and knowledge of conspiracy. | Morgan asserts recordings show knowledge and additional acts. | Record insufficient; remand for new trial on RICO and conspiracy. |
| Effect of missing transcript of recordings on review | Record supports admission of recordings; transcript not provided. | State relied on recordings to prove elements; no transcript hindering conviction. | Record defect requires remand; cannot determine sufficiency on appeal. |
| Affirmance of felon in possession conviction | Morgan challenges only RICO/conspiracy. | No challenge to felon in possession. | Felon in possession conviction affirmed. |
Key Cases Cited
- Lugo v. State, 845 So.2d 74 (Fla. 2003) (defines RICO elements and pattern of activity)
- Gross v. State, 765 So.2d 39 (Fla. 2000) (pattern of racketeering requires two similar predicate acts)
- Sanchez v. State, 89 So.3d 912 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012) (requires knowledge or two predicate acts for conspiracy)
- Sanchez v. State, 89 So.3d 916 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002) (conspiracy element and knowledge standard clarified)
- Mese v. State, 824 So.2d 908 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002) (explains conspiracy participation standard)
- Velez v. State, 645 So.2d 42 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994) (omissions from trial transcript and review)
- McKenzie v. State, 754 So.2d 851 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000) (omissions requiring new trial when missing material transcript)
- Thomas v. State, 828 So.2d 456 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002) (missing portions of transcript may require new trial)