Skip to main content

Genovese Organized Crime Family Associate Frank DiMattina Convicted of Extortion and a Related Firearms Charge

Following a three-day trial, a federal jury in Brooklyn today returned a verdict convicting Genovese Organized Crime Family associate Frank DiMattina, also known as “Frankie D” and “Frankie Ariana,” of Hobbs Act extortion and a related firearms charge.

The conviction was announced by Loretta E. Lynch, United States Attorney for the Eastern District of New York, and Janice K. Fedarcyk, Assistant Director in Charge, Federal Bureau of Investigation, New York Field Office.

The counts of conviction included the 2010 extortion of a Staten Island caterer who was forced to withdraw his bid on a lucrative Staten Island Catholic school lunch program contract, which was in competition with a bid submitted by the defendant. At trial, the victim caterer testified that the defendant threatened him by displaying a gun and by threatening to have a co-conspirator assault the victim if he did not withdraw his bid. As part of the threat, DiMattina also told the victim to warn his business partner, a bagel store owner, that DiMattina would “burn down his bagel stores” if the victim and his partner did not withdraw their bid. The government presented the testimony of several witnesses at trial, including the extortion victim and a priest who was responsible for overseeing the bid process for the school lunch program.

“This case demonstrates organized crime still conducts its business in its traditional way—by relying on threats and violence to intimidate hardworking individuals trying to make a legitimate living. Here, the defendant sought to use fear and intimidation to obtain business, rather than honest competition. Such efforts will always be met with the full force of the law,” stated United States Attorney Lynch. “We will not rest until organized crime is eradicated from our communities.”

FBI Assistant Director in Charge Fedarcyk stated, “New York’s organized crime families are the embodiment of the saying, ‘The more things change, the more they stay the same.’ Whatever the money-making scheme, violence or the threat of violence is always looming as the means to the criminal end. The FBI remains committed to stopping it.”

When sentenced by United States District Judge Jack B. Weinstein, the defendant faces a mandatory minimum sentence of five years of imprisonment.

The government’s case was prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorney Jack Dennehy.

The Defendant:
Name: FRANK DIMATTINA
Age: 44

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

15 Gang Members Convicted on Conspiracy, Weapons Possession, Firearms Trafficking Charges Case Follows Recent Convictions of 137th Street Crew and East Harlem Narcotics Trafficking Organization

Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., announced the results of the investigation and prosecution of one of Central Harlem’s most destructive criminal street gangs, referred to as “ONE TWENTY-NINE” or “GOODFELLAS/THE NEW DONS,” which terrorized the neighborhood surrounding West 129th Street between Lenox and Fifth Avenues. Thirteen members of the gang have previously pleaded guilty to importing, possessing, and using firearms over the course of the conspiracy.

The Myth, The Matrix, and The Malpractice: Unpacking the Sophia Stewart Saga

The internet loves a good underdog story, especially one where a lone creator battles Hollywood giants. Few tales have captivated online forums and social media quite like that of Sophia Stewart, the woman who famously sued the creators of The Matrix and The Terminator, claiming they stole her work, "The Third Eye." Her story is a complex tapestry woven with claims of stolen genius, judicial conflicts, and attorney negligence. Let's untangle the legal facts from the compelling narrative and examine the heart of her claims. The Core Allegation: "The Third Eye" and the Blockbusters Sophia Stewart alleged that her copyrighted manuscript, "The Third Eye," conceived in 1981 and finalized in 1983, was the blueprint for two of the most iconic sci-fi franchises: The Terminator (first film 1984) and The Matrix (first film 1999). From her perspective, the similarities were undeniable. Stewart’s supporters often point to broad, impactful themes and ev...

Charlie Kirk Was Right, and Charlie Kirk Was Wrong: The Enduring Legacy of the Civil Rights Act of 1964

Charlie Kirk, a prominent conservative commentator, has argued that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was unnecessary, contending that the 14th Amendment should have been sufficient to guarantee equal rights. There's a compelling argument to be made for both sides of this statement. Let's break down where Kirk was right and, more importantly, where historical context reveals he was profoundly wrong. Where Charlie Kirk Was "Right" (In Theory) Kirk's theoretical point hinges on the idea that fundamental constitutional principles, if interpreted and enforced correctly, should have negated the need for additional legislation. And, in a perfect world, he would be correct. The 14th Amendment, ratified in 1868, explicitly states that "no State shall... deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." The intent was to ensure all citizens, particularly newly freed African Americans, were treated equally under the law. If this ...