Harper v. State

The trial court erroneously applied the tolling provision of O.C.G.A. § 17-3-2.2 to certain counts of the indictment, since those offenses were against a corporation, not the individual who was the only alleged victim that was 65 years old or older.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

James R. Harper, III, Jerry W. Chapman, and Jeffery L. Pombert bring this appeal from the trial court’s orders denying their various motions challenging charges of theft and violation of the Georgia Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations “RICO” Act, see OCGA § 16-14-1 et seq. The charges for which they have been indicted relate to property of Glock, Inc., and various entities associated with it, and the defendants raise issues regarding the relevant statutes of limitation. For the reasons that follow, we affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand the case to the trial court with direction.

On January 22, 2010, Harper, Chapman, and Pombert were jointly indicted and charged with violating the RICO Act through a pattern of “setting up entities and bank accounts and transferring Glock1 assets and funds through and among various of these entities and accounts, thereby diverting and attempting to divert Glock funds to their own use and control.” There were ten other charges in the indictment; one count of attempted theft, two counts of theft that named all three men, and seven counts of theft naming only Harper and Chapman. According to the indictment, Harper, an attorney, was hired in 2000 by the Georgia corporations of Glock, Inc. and Consultinvest, Inc., as well as Mr. Gaston Glock, to, among other things, investigate allegations of possible wrongdoing by one or more persons previously associated with these corporations, and Harper hired Chapman and Pombert to assist him collectively, “the defendants”. In the course their work for the Glock entities, it is alleged, the defendants conspired to take more than $3,000,000 of funds belonging to one or more of the various Glock entities, as well as from other corporations and entities associated with the Glock enterprises, and engaged in acts in furtherance of that conspiracy.

Harper v. State

The trial court erroneously applied the tolling provision of O.C.G.A. § 17-3-2.2 to certain counts of the indictment, since those offenses were against a corporation, not the individual who was the only alleged victim that was 65 years old or older.

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to Daily Report