JAMES PIZZO, JR., APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
James Pizzo, Jr. appealed his convictions for organized fraud and conspiracy to commit racketeering arising from his employment with a family home improvement business. The court affirmed his organized fraud conviction but reversed his conspiracy conviction due to fundamental error in jury instructions, and remanded for a new trial on that charge.
The court affirmed Pizzo's conviction for organized fraud but reversed his conviction for conspiracy to commit racketeering due to fundamental error in jury instructions. The court also noted that the trial court erred in imposing restitution, costs of prosecution, and costs of investigation after Pizzo filed a timely notice of appeal.
[1] A conviction for organized fraud may be affirmed when issues regarding the admission of bad acts evidence, the admission of certain testimony, and the oral delivery of ju…
[2] A conviction for conspiracy to commit racketeering may be reversed when the jury instructions on that crime are fundamentally erroneous.
Previewing 2 of 3 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“We affirm Mr. Pizzo's conviction for organized fraud. Due to the fact that the jury instructions were fundamentally erroneous, we reverse Mr. Pizzo's conviction for conspiracy to commit racketeering and remand for a new trial.”
Establishes the split disposition of the appeal, affirming organized fraud conviction while reversing conspiracy conviction due to jury instruction error.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceJames Pizzo, Jr. was employed with East Coast Exteriors, Inc., a family-owned home improvement business operated by his son, James Frank "Jimmy" Pizzo…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Organized Fraud cases and more on FLexlaw
KELLY, Judge.
James Pizzo, Jr., a/k/a James Pizzo, Sr., seeks review of his judgment and sentence for organized fraud and conspiracy to commit racketeering, which arose out of his employment with East Coast Exteriors, Inc., a family-owned home improvement business operated by his son, James Frank “Jimmy” Pizzo. We affirm Mr. Pizzo’s conviction for organized fraud. Due to the fact that the jury instructions were fundamentally erroneous, we reverse Mr. Pizzo’s conviction for conspiracy to commit racketeering and remand for a new trial.
The facts of this case are set forth fully in Jimmy Pizzo’s appeal, Pizzo v. State, No. 2D03-4913, — So. 2d -, 2005 WL 1704833 (Fla. 2d DCA July 22, 2005) (“Piz-zo I”). In this appeal, Mr. Pizzo raises seven issues on appeal, several of which are identical to those raised by Jimmy in Pizzo I. As we did in Pizzo I, we affirm without comment the issues regarding (1) the admission of bad acts evidence, (2) the admission of certain testimony of Special Agent Charles Leonard, and (3) the oral delivery of the jury instructions on organized fraud. We also affirm without comment the additional issues Mr. Pizzo raises regarding (4) the denial of Mr. Pizzo’s motion for judgment of acquittal on organized fraud and (5) the denial of Mr. Piz-zo’s motion for judgment of acquittal on conspiracy to commit racketeering.
We reverse Mr. Pizzo’s conviction for conspiracy to commit racketeering because, as we held in Pizzo I, the trial court committed fundamental error in instructing the jury on the crime of conspiracy to commit racketeering. See Cabrera v. State, 890 So. 2d 506, 507 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005); see also Rios v. State, 905 So. 2d 931, 932 (Fla. 2d 2005).
Our reversal renders Mr. Pizzo’s remaining issue regarding his sentence moot. However, as we did in Pizzo I, we note that the court erred in imposing restitution, costs of prosecution, and costs of investigation after Mr. Pizzo filed a timely notice of appeal. See K.D. v. State, 779 So. 2d 468, 468 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000); Skaggs v. State, 620 So. 2d 1304, 1305 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993).
In conclusion, we affirm Mr. Pizzo’s conviction for organized fraud and reverse Mr. Pizzo’s conviction for conspiracy to commit racketeering. We remand for fur ther proceedings consistent with this opinion.
Affirmed in part; reversed in part; and remanded.
ALTENBERND and SALCINES, JJ., Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Pizzo v. State, 916 So. 2d 828 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005)…e fraud. She has appealed those convictions in Pizzo v. State, 910 So. 2d 287 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005). James, Mr. Pizzo's father, was convicted of organized fraud and conspiracy to commit racketeering. He has appealed those convictions in Pizzo v. State, 910 So. 2d 286 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005). Edwina was found guilty of organized fraud, but her conviction was set aside by the trial court. . In fact, Mr. Pizzo quoted several of the named victims interest rates between 6% and 7% but the victims were usually financed wit…
Authorities Cited
- Cabrera v. State, 890 So. 2d 506 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005)
- Skaggs v. State, 620 So. 2d 1304 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993)
- K.D. v. State, 779 So. 2d 468 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000)
- Nestor Rios v. State, 905 So. 2d 931 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005)