State v. Reyan, 145 So. 3d 133

Reyan was charged in a single substantive RICO count under § 895.03(3) based on a 2002–2005 scheme by Wackenhut to defraud MDT.
The State alleged 840 predicate acts of organized scheme to defraud and grand theft, but did not allege a conspiracy by Reyan in Count One.
Affidavit linked Reyan to payroll preparation and invoicing, including inputting sign-in data and identifying hours to bill.
Reyan’s last personal predicate act was December 28, 2003; she ceased advising her replacement in June 2004 and had no further contact after May 2004.
Trial court dismissed the RICO charge as time-barred, ruling five-year period expired December 28, 2008; prosecution filed September 2010.
State argued the limitations period runs from the enterprise’s last act so long as Reyan remained associated; Reyan argued it runs from her last act.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
When does the five-year limit begin for substantive RICO?	State: begins with last enterprise act during association.	Reyan: begins with last personal predicate act.	Limitations run from last personal act.

O’Malley v. Mounts, 590 So.2d 437 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991) (grand theft not a continuing offense; focus on personal acts)
Pérsico, 832 F.2d 705 (2d Cir. 1987) (separate focus for substantive RICO vs. conspiracy; personal acts matter)
Yannotti, 541 F.3d 112 (2d Cir. 2008) (RICO conspiracy does not require predicate acts; distinguishes conspiracy vs. substantive RICO)
United States v. Walsh, 700 F.2d 846 (2d Cir. 1983) (Walsh parented limitation for substantive RICO requiring timely predicate act)
United States v. Persico, 832 F.2d 705 (2d Cir. 1987) (conspiracy vs. substantive RICO distinction; commencement timing)