In the United States Court of Appeals For the Second Circuit

August Term 2021

No. 21-932(L), 21-937(CON), 21-950(CON), 21-992(CON), 21-1548(CON) - NARDINO COLOTTI, ALEX RUDAJ, PRENKA IVEZAJ, NIKOLA DEDAJ, ANGELO DIPIETRO,

Petitioners-Appellants,

v.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Respondent-Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York No. 04 Cr. 110 (DLC), 11 Civ. 1782 (DLC), 11 Civ. 1510 (DLC), 11 Civ. 1402 (DLC), 11 Civ. 1556 (DLC), 20 Civ. 4889 (DLC) Denise L. Cote, District Judge, Presiding. (Argued June 2, 2022; Decided June 21, 2023)

1 21-932 (L) U.S. v. Colotti

Before: LEVAL, PARKER, and MENASHI, Circuit Judges.

Petitioners-Appellants appeal from a judgment of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Cote, J.) denying their petitions brought pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to vacate, set aside, or correct their convictions under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c). The district court held that their substantive RICO convictions, on which their § 924(c) convictions were based, were valid “crimes of violence.” Because we are confident that a properly instructed jury would have based the petitioners’ § 924(c) convictions upon a valid predicate crime of violence, we AFFIRM.

EDWARD S. ZAS, (David E. Patton, on the brief), Federal Defenders of New York, Inc., New York, N.Y. for Petitioners-Appellants Nardino Colotti, Alex Rudaj, and Nikola Dedaj,

Michael S. Schacter and Ravi Chaderraj, Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP, New York, N.Y. for Petitioner-Appellant Prenka Ivezaj,

Anthony DiPietro, Law Offices of Anthony DiPietro P.C., White Plains, N.Y. for Petitioner- Appellant Angelo DiPietro,

ANDREW JONES (Karl Metzner, on the brief), for Damian Williams, United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York, New York, N.Y. for Respondent-Appellee.

2 21-932 (L) U.S. v. Colotti BARRINGTON D. PARKER, Circuit Judge:

Nardino Colotti, Alex Rudaj, Nikola Dedaj, Prenka Ivezaj, and Angelo DiPietro filed successive habeas corpus petitions challenging their convictions and mandatory sentences imposed by the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Cote, J.). This appeal focuses on their convictions under Count Thirteen of the indictment, which charged them with using and carrying firearms during and in relation to a crime of violence, 18 U.S.C. § 924(c), based on an offense charged in Count One, racketeering activity in violation of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO”), 18 U.S.C. § 1962(c). The predicate acts underlying the RICO charge included two offenses (Racketeering Acts Four and Five) consisting of either second degree grand larceny by extortion under New York law, or conspiracy or attempt to commit that offense. The jury expressly found Racketeering Acts Four and Five to have been proven as to all defe