`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
`
`UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
`
`-against-
`
`RAHEEM JONES,
`
`Defendant.
`
`No. 15 Cr. 661 (NSR)
`
`OPINION & ORDER
`
`NELSONS. ROMAN, United States District Judge
`
`Defendant Raheem Jones ("Defendant" or "Jones") has been charged with criminal
`
`conduct under two separate indictments, Indictment No. 15 Cr. 661 (NSR) (the "present
`
`Indictment") and Indictment No. 17 Cr. 644 (NSR) (the "RICO Indictment"). Now before the
`
`Comt is the Government's application for a comt order consolidating these cases and permitting
`
`a joint trial. Defendant not only fails to oppose the motion, but affirmatively joins in the
`
`application. For the following reasons, the motion is GRANTED on consent.
`
`Under the present Indictment, Defendant is charged as a felon in possession of a firearm
`
`in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(l) following the recovery ofa handgun in a backpack
`
`possessed by the Defendant. (Comp!., ECF No. 1.) The criminal charges stem from an incident
`
`which occurred on September 15, 2015, wherein law enforcement officers responded to a radio
`
`run of shots fired in the vicinity of Clinton Avenue in New Rochelle, New York. (Id.~ 3a.)
`
`Officers were informed that an individual in a black BMW SUV fired shots into another car. (Id.
`
`~ 3b.) An eyewitness purportedly described the shooter as a black man with "a decent amount of
`
`hair." (Id.) Shortly after the shooting, officers located a vehicle matching the description of the
`
`BMW SUV driving away from the vicinity of the shooting. (Id.~ 3d.) Following a motor
`
`vehicle and foot chase, Jones was apprehended, and a backpack containing a handgun was
`
`
`
`Case 7:15-cr-00661-NSR Document 30 Filed 11/15/17 Page 2 of 3
`
`recovered.
`
`Under the subsequent RICO Indictment, Jones and seven other co-defendants are charged
`
`with paiticipating in a racketeering conspiracy in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1962(d) and the use of
`
`firearms in relation to the racketeering in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c). It is alleged that from
`
`or about 2008 through 2017, Jones, along with his co-conspirators, participated in a series of
`
`criminal activities, including murder, assault, robbery, and narcotics trafficking as a member of
`
`the "Goonies" or Goon Squad. In furtherance of these crimes, it is alleged that Jones possessed,
`
`brandished, and discharged firearms.
`
`The Government seeks a joint trial on the basis that the facts and evidence to be presented
`
`in both cases are inextricably intertwined. The Government asse1ts it will rely on the same
`
`evidence it intends to proffer under the present Indictment to prove key elements of the crimes
`
`charged in the RICO Indictment. In particular, the Government asserts that Jones's criminal
`
`conduct charged in the present Indictment was committed in fu1therance of the racketeering
`
`conspiracy charged in the RICO Indictment.
`
`Rule 13 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure provides that "[t]he court may order
`
`that separate cases be tried together as though brought in a single indictment or information if all
`
`offenses and all defendants could have been joined in a single indictment or information." Fed.
`
`R. Crim. P. 13. Thus, the decision to order two indictments be tried together is left to the sound
`
`discretion of the comt. See United States v. Antonelli Fireworks Co., 155 F.2d 631, 635 (2d Cir.),
`
`cert. denied, 329 U.S. 742 (1946). In exercising such discretion, however, the court must be
`
`mindful of the constraints created by Rule 8 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. See
`
`United States v. Westcom, No. 13-CR-93, 2014 WL 12633537, at *3 (D. Vt. Apr. 23, 2014)
`
`(citing USA v. Halper, 590 F.2d 422, 428-29 (2d Cir. 1978)).
`
`2
`
`
`
`Case 7:15-cr-00661-NSR Document 30 Filed 11/15/17 Page 3 of 3
`
`Rule 8(b) provides, in relevant part, that an indictment may charge two or more
`
`defendants if they are alleged to have participated in the same act or transaction, or in the same
`
`series of acts or transactions, constituting an offense or set of offenses. Fed. R. Crim. P. 8(b).
`
`Fmther, joinder of offenses under the Rule 8(b) is permissible if the offenses are of the same or
`
`similar character such that evidence of the separate crimes would be admissible at the separate
`
`trials. Halper, 590 F.2d at 431. In such cases, the defendant is not unfairly prejudiced by the joint
`
`trial of the offenses. Id.
`
`In the instant matters, not only are the offenses related but evidence from the present
`
`Indictment is relevant to, and substantially supports the charges alleged in the RICO Indictment.
`
`Additionally, the same evidence would be used to prove the crimes charged under the present
`
`Indictment and portions of the RICO Indictment. Taking into consideration judicial efficiency
`
`and the minimal risk of prejudice to the Defendant, the Government's application for a joint trial
`
`is granted.
`
`CONCLUSION
`
`For the foregoing reasons, the Government's motion for a comt order directing that
`
`Indictment No. 15 Cr. 661 and Indictment 17 Cr. 644 be jointly tried is GRANTED. The Clerk
`
`of the Court is respectfully directed to terminate the final pre-trial conference scheduled on
`
`December I, 2017 and adjourn sine die the trial scheduled to commence December 11, 2017.
`
`The Clerk of the Court is also respectfully directed to terminate the motion at ECF No. 28. This
`
`constitutes the Comt's Opinion and Order.
`
`Dated: November_!_$_, 2017
`White Plains, New York
`
`SO ORDERED:
`
`~.-NELSON S. ROMAN
`
`United States District Judge
`
`3
`
`