UNITED STATES V. SUMMERS 414 F.3d 1287 (10th Cir. 2005) CASE BRIEF

UNITED STATES V. SUMMERS

414 F.3d 1287 (10th Cir. 2005)

NATURE OF THE CASE: Summers and Thomas (Ds) were convicted of bank robbery and aiding and abetting in violation of 18 U.S.C.S. 2113(2) and conspiracy to commit bank robbery in violation of 18 U.S.C.S. 371 and 2113(a). The United States District Court denied their motions for acquittal and for a new trial. Ds appealed their convictions.

FACTS: Mohammed and Frazier robbed Bank of America. They escaped the scene in a gold Acura automobile. The Acura began moving as they entered the vehicle, implying the existence of an unidentified accomplice. The car had been stolen four days prior to the bank robbery, and was later found in the Vista Montano Apartments located a short distance from the bank. Mohammed and Frazier pleaded guilty to charges of bank robbery. The Vista Montano Apartments are adjacent to the Pinnacle View Apartments. Shortly before the bank robbery, the Pinnacle View Apartments manager observed three individuals enter the apartment complex after parking the Acura outside the main gate. She requested that the complex's maintenance workers 'see where they were going, what apartment they were going to.' They entered Apartment 2013 with a black bag. It was rented to Adrienne McCastle. Her boyfriend, Marvin Thomas stayed at the apartment though he was not a party to the lease. Five to ten minutes later, maintenance workers saw three individuals leave in the company of Mr. Thomas. They were unable to identify Summers as one of the individuals in the group. They left in a red Ford Escape sport utility vehicle. Thomas had rented the vehicle three days earlier. Thomas returned after five or ten minutes, then left again a short time later. A police officer investigating the theft of the Acura contacted the Pinnacle View Apartments manager. She had seen a car matching the description of the stolen automobile, but by the time the officer arrived the vehicle had been moved. Maintenance workers informed the apartment manager that the three individuals had returned to Apartment 2013. The police were notified and they established surveillance of the area. Four individuals exited Apartment 2013 and left the complex in the red Ford Escape. Police followed and after a short pursuit, during the Ford Escape exceeded the speed limit by some fifteen miles per hour, officers were successful in stopping the vehicle. They conducted a felony stop, handcuffing and frisking the four occupants of the vehicle. The occupants were Summers, Thomas, Mohammed, and Frazier. Officers discovered $5,142.10 in cash in Thomas's pockets, including ten 'bait bills' subsequently identified by the Bank of America. Thomas also possessed a key to Apartment 2013. They discovered zippered bank bags containing significant quantities of cash or cash equivalents, clothing and latex gloves resembling those used in the robbery, a purple pillowcase containing cash and coins, and a large amount of cash in the cargo area. Summers and Thomas were silent but Mohammed confessed to the robbery. Apartment 2013 revealed keys to the stolen Acura and clothing similar to that worn during the bank robbery. They found vault blocks, coin wrappers, cash straps, and torn paperwork from the Bank of America. All were indicted for bank robbery and aiding and abetting and conspiracy to commit bank robbery. Mohammed and Frazier pleaded guilty to bank robbery and aiding and abetting. Summers and Thomas were tried and convicted on both counts of the indictment. Summers (D) filed a motion for judgment of acquittal on the basis that insufficient evidence existed to support his conviction. That motion was denied. D filed a motion to vacate the guilty verdicts, for withholding exculpatory evidence. Thomas (D1) filed a motion for a new trial, arguing that his Sixth Amendment confrontation right was violated by the admission of a testimonial hearsay statement and incorporating D's motion with respect to the exclusion of exculpatory evidence. The motions were denied. This appeal resulted.

ISSUE:

RULE OF LAW:

HOLDING AND DECISION:

LEGAL ANALYSIS:

Get free access to the entire content for Mac, PC or Online

for 2-3 days and free samples of all kinds of products.

https://bsmsphd.com

© 2007-2016 Abn Study Partner