Background
Rasheem Bogan, a member of the Fifth Street Gang, was involved in a fatal drive-by shooting in 2006 at the age of 14. An initial state murder conviction was reversed, and he ultimately pleaded guilty to lesser charges and was imprisoned. After his release in 2014, Bogan was convicted of several more felonies over the years and resumed his activities with the gang.
In 2020, Bogan participated in another gang-related shooting that seriously wounded a bystander. Federal prosecutors subsequently charged him with, among other things, a RICO conspiracy. The indictment listed four overt acts by Bogan, including his participation in the 2006 homicide he committed as a juvenile.
Bogan moved to dismiss the RICO charge, arguing that under the Juvenile Delinquency Act (JDA), his actions as a 14-year-old could not be used as a predicate act in a federal prosecution. He also challenged the constitutionality of the federal law banning felons from possessing firearms. The district court denied his motions, and Bogan entered a conditional guilty plea, preserving his right to appeal the denials.
The Court’s Holding
The Eighth Circuit affirmed the district court’s decision, holding that Bogan’s juvenile conduct could be included in the adult RICO prosecution. The court adopted the majority view held by most other federal circuits: a defendant who continues to participate in a conspiracy after reaching the age of majority (18) thereby “ratifies” their prior conduct in that same conspiracy, even acts committed as a juvenile. In such cases, the JDA, which provides a separate procedural path for juvenile offenses, is inapplicable.
The court found that the indictment sufficiently alleged Bogan’s post-majority ratification through his continued involvement in the Fifth Street Gang’s racketeering activities into 2020. The court rejected Bogan’s reliance on Supreme Court cases like Roper v. Simmons, which recognize juveniles’ diminished culpability for punishment purposes. The court reasoned that those cases do not prevent the consideration of juvenile acts when an adult’s later criminal activity shows a continuation of, rather than a deviation from, their past criminal pursuits. The court summarily affirmed the denial of the challenge to the felon-in-possession statute, citing binding circuit precedent.
Key Takeaways
- In the Eighth Circuit, juvenile criminal acts can serve as predicates in a RICO conspiracy case if the defendant continues to participate in the conspiracy after turning 18.
- By continuing a criminal conspiracy into adulthood, a defendant is considered to have “ratified” their earlier actions, making them admissible in an adult prosecution for the continuing crime.
- The constitutional concerns about punishing juveniles (as outlined in Roper v. Simmons) do not prevent the use of juvenile acts as evidence to prove an element of a crime committed as an adult.
Why It Matters
This decision aligns the Eighth Circuit with the overwhelming majority of federal appellate courts on the use of juvenile acts in continuing-crime prosecutions. It solidifies the “ratification” theory, giving prosecutors a clear basis to include evidence of a defendant’s entire course of conduct in long-running conspiracy cases, even when the conduct began before the defendant was a legal adult. This is particularly significant in prosecutions of organized crime and gang activity, where criminal careers often start at a young age.
The ruling clarifies the boundary between punishing someone for a past juvenile crime and using that past conduct as an evidentiary component of a present adult crime. It reinforces that while the justice system treats juvenile offenders differently regarding punishment, it does not require ignoring their history when that history is directly relevant to proving a continuing criminal enterprise that extends into adulthood.