State v. Singh
291 Ga. 525
| Ga. | 2012Background
- State sues Hargurtag Singh and Rajan Singh, LLC under Georgia RICO seeking injunctive relief and in rem forfeiture for alleged illegal gambling at Pure Gas Station in Clayton County.
- Trial court seizes cash and equipment, freezes assets, issues TRO, and appoints a receiver; later a consent agreement allows operation under supervision.
- Singh moves to dismiss (1) failure to state a Georgia RICO claim and (2) unconstitutional in personam forfeiture claims.
- Trial court dismisses in personam RICO claims under Cisco and Pittman concurrence; rejects in rem issues as not giving rise to in personam relief.
- State appeals and Singh cross-appeals; appellate jurisdiction and the constitutionality of in personam RICO relief are central; Patel v. State informs the court’s approach to equitable remedies.
- Court ultimately reverses on in personam claims and affirms related matters, clarifying that 16-14-6 permits equitable relief without converting to unconstitutional in personam forfeiture.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jurisdiction for direct appeal from partial dismissal | State; appealable under 5-6-34(a)(4) | Singh; lacks interlocutory appeal | Direct appeal proper under 5-6-34(a)(4) |
| Constitutionality of in personam RICO claims under Cisco/Pittman | Equitable remedies under 16-14-6 valid; not in personam forfeiture | In personam 16-14-6/7(m) unconstitutional | Reversed; Patel allows equitable relief without converting to in personam for forfeiture |
| Sufficiency of the motion to dismiss under 9-11-12(b)(6) | Complaint states felony predicates under 16-12-22/28 | No proof presented; machines may be legal, but facts alleged show felony predicates | Denial of motion to dismiss sustained; state stated a claim |
Key Cases Cited
- Cisco v. State of Ga., 285 Ga. 656 (Ga. 2009) (in personam forfeiture under OCGA 16-14-7(m) unconstitutional without safeguards)
- Pittman v. State of Ga., 288 Ga. 589 (Ga. 2011) (concurrence cautions about in personam RICO; no ruling on 16-14-6 itself)
- Patel v. State, 289 Ga. 479 (Ga. 2011) (upholds equitable receiver/injunction in RICO with in rem forfeiture)
- Ultra Telecom v. State of Ga., 288 Ga. 65 (Ga. 2010) (reaffirmed related RICO/forfeiture framework)
- Knott v. Evans, 280 Ga. 515 (Ga. 2006) (equitable relief not available against in rem entities)