UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, APPELLEE,
v.
WILLIAM FILLMORE CROUCH, APPELLANT
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court affirmed the conviction for armed bank robbery and found the issues regarding the conspiracy conviction moot due to concurrent sentencing.
Appellant was convicted of armed bank robbery and conspiracy after a jury trial. He was positively identified as the robber of one bank, and the consp…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Conspiracy To Commit Bank Robbery cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM:
William Fillmore Crouch was found guilty after a jury trial of the offense of armed bank robbery, 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a) (d), and of conspiracy to commit bank robbery, 18 U.S.C. § 371. On June 12, 1970, he was committed to the custody of the Attorney General for a term of 20 years on the conviction of armed bank robbery and for a term of five years on the conspiracy conviction, the sentences to be served concurrently.
Two banks in Santa Rosa, California, were robbed on the same day at approximately the same time by lone robbers. One was the Lincoln National Bank and the other the Exchange Bank. As to the substantive count of armed bank robbery, the appellant was positively identified as the individual who robbed the Lincoln National by four persons who were inside the bank at the time and by one person who saw appellant outside the bank. No serious objection is made with respect to the proceedings leading to this conviction. It is affirmed. The conspiracy charge was based upon appellant’s relationship with the lone robber of the Exchange Bank.
A number of issues have been raised with respect to the verdict on the conspiracy count but we feel not compelled to decide them in view of the fact that the five-year term which was imposed for conviction on this count is to be served concurrently with the 20 year sentence to be served for the conviction on the substantive charge about which there is no question. Benton v. Maryland, 395 U.S. 784, 787, 89 S.Ct. 2056, 23 L.Ed.2d 707 (1969); Noriega v. United States, 437 F. 2d 435 (9th Cir. 1971); Jordan v. United States, 416 F. 2d 338, 346 (9th Cir. 1969), cert. denied, 397 U.S. 920, 90 S.Ct. 930, 25 L.Ed.2d 101 (1970); Page v. United States, 356 F. 2d 337, 338 (9th Cir. 1966).
Judgment affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
United States v. Tyler, 466 F.2d 920 (9th Cir. 1972)
Authorities Cited
- Benton v. Maryland, 395 U.S. 784 (U.S. 1969)
- Laidlaw Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd., 397 U.S. 920 (U.S. 1970)
- Jordan v. United States, 416 F.2d 338 (9th Cir. 1969)
- Earnest T. Page v. United States, 356 F.2d 337 (9th Cir. 1966)
- Noriega v. United States, 437 F.2d 435 (9th Cir. 1971)