United States v. Fazio
770 F.3d 160
2d Cir.2014Background
- Fazio Senior, Fazio Junior, and John Fazio extorted payments from Local 348 employers under threat of harm; convictions on racketeering, extortion, money-laundering, and labor-payments offenses; district court sentenced each defendant to multi-year terms; on appeal, three issues raised: admission of organized-crime reputation evidence, a jury instruction dispute on the fear element, and dismissal of a juror.
- Evidence showed employers paid to avoid harassment; reputation evidence linked Fazios to organized crime and was argued to shape victims' fear; government introduced Shoe Mania phone calls reflecting mafia-type references.
- District court admitted reputation evidence and denied severance; district court denied excluding the Shoe Mania calls, ruling the evidence relevant to fear and conspiratorial context.
- There was a mid-trial juror issue where Juror No.5 was dismissed for veracity concerns; the appellate court upheld the district court’s dismissal.
- Overall, the convictions were affirmed on all counts; other appellate arguments were found meritless.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admissibility of organized-crime reputation evidence | Fazio argued reputation evidence was inadmissible absent actual mafia ties | Appellants argued reputation evidence was irrelevant without proof of actual organized-crime ties | Admissible; reputation evidence relevant to fear element and victims' reasonableness |
| Jury instruction on fear and economic loss | Fazio Junior requested instruction limiting fear to legally entitled economic loss | Garda distinction not required; Garda dicta not controlling; jury instruction adequate | Denied; district court properly instructed on fear and economic loss; Garda limits rejected |
| Dismissal of Juror No. 5 | Defendants argued no basis to dismiss juror; motion premature | Government argued substantial credibility concerns; juror dismissed for inability to follow instructions | Upheld; district court did not abuse discretion in dismissing Juror No.5 |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Coppola, 671 F.3d 220 (2d Cir. 2012) (defines Hobbs Act fear element; supports reasonable-fear standard)
- United States v. Mulder, 273 F.3d 91 (2d Cir. 2001) (reputation evidence admissible where it conveys tacit threat of violence)
- Garcia v. United States, 907 F.2d 380 (2d Cir. 1990) (extortion through loss of an advantage not legally obtained; Garda dichotomy addressed)
- United States v. Garda, 907 F.2d 379 (2d Cir. 1990) (extortion requires fear coercion; context of illegal advantage discussed (dicta))