United States v. Fiander

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that a defendant who could not be prosecuted for violating the CCTA could nevertheless be prosecuted for a RICO conspiracy to violate that statute
• “Washington law requires cigarettes sold in the state to have a stamp showing either that the tax was paid or that the cigarettes were tax-exempt.”
• explaining a defendant need not commit the substantive offense to be guilty of RICO conspiracy; rather “it is sufficient that he knew about and agreed to facilitate the scheme” (cleaned up)
• “Because Fiander did not provide notice to the state prior to transporting the cigarettes, the cigarettes he transported were contraband within the meaning of the CCTA.”
• “[A]lthough [defendant] may not be prosecuted for a substantive violation of the 10 CCTA because of his status as a member of the Yakama Nation, he may be prosecuted for a 11 RICO conspiracy in which the racketeering activity is contraband cigarette trafficking.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).