intent, or identification, so long as the probative value of the evidence is not substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice to the defendant. Fed.R.Evid. 404(b); Fed.R.Evid. 403. Toliver was charged under the RICO statute, and thus the government was required to prove that he was “employed by or associated with any enterprise ” affecting its purpose through racketeering activity. 18 U.S.C. § 1962(c) (2006) (emphasis added). The Supreme Court has held that an “enterprise” under the statute includes “a group of persons associated together for a common purpose of engaging in a course of conduct.” United States v. Turkette, 452 U.S. 576, 583, 101 S.Ct. 2524, 69 L.Ed.2d 246 (1981); see also Boyle v. United States, — U.S. -, 129 S.Ct. 2237, 2245-46, 173 L.Ed.2d 1265 (2009) (<HOLDING>). For an individual to be convicted of a RICO
holding that to constitute an enterprise under rico the enterprises structure must provide some mechanism for controlling and directing the affairs of the group on an ongoing rather than an ad hoc basis holding that a rico enterprise does not need to have a formal businesslike structure or hierarchy holding that private plaintiffs can seek equitable relief under rico holding that predicate acts need not be in furtherance of the enterprise holding that an enterprise under rico need not have a businesslike structure and can have a rather informal organization