Raymond Gill v. US


UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to amend/correct [999709920-2]. Originating case number: 1:13-cr-00577-RDB-1. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999902279]. [15-4178]

Download PDF
Appeal: 15-4178 Doc: 62 Filed: 08/02/2016 Pg: 1 of 3 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-4178 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. RAYMOND EDWARD GILL, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Richard D. Bennett, District Judge. (1:13-cr-00577-RDB-1) Submitted: July 28, 2016 Decided: August 2, 2016 Before AGEE, KEENAN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Joseph Murtha, MURTHA, PSORAS & LANASA LLC, Lutherville, Maryland, for Appellant. Rod J. Rosenstein, United States Attorney, Paul E. Budlow, Assistant United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Appeal: 15-4178 Doc: 62 Filed: 08/02/2016 Pg: 2 of 3 PER CURIAM: Raymond Edward Gill was convicted by a jury of one count of armed bank robbery, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a), (d), and (f) (2012), and one count of brandishing a firearm in furtherance of a crime of violence in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) (2012). Gill was sentenced to 300 months for the bank robbery and 180 months consecutive on the brandishing count, for a total sentence of 480 months of imprisonment. On appeal Gill asserts that bank robbery may be accomplished by intimidation only and thus argues that it is not a crime of violence. on this premise, Gill raises two issues: Based (1) whether his § 924(c) conviction must be reversed because federal bank robbery is not a crime of violence in the wake of Johnson v. United States, 135 S. Ct. 2551 (2015); and (2) whether the district court erred in sentencing him as a career offender because armed bank robbery no longer constitutes a crime of violence after Johnson. We affirm. We review both issues for plain error only because Gill raises the issues for the first time on appeal. v. Olano, 507 U.S. 725, 732 (1993). United States Both issues fail, however, based on our recent opinion in United States v. McNeal, 818 F.3d 141 (4th Cir. 2016). In McNeal, we held that taking by intimidation under § 2113(a) involves the threat to use physical force and thus armed bank robbery 2 is a crime of violence Appeal: 15-4178 Doc: 62 pursuant because to we Filed: 08/02/2016 18 U.S.C. find both Pg: 3 of 3 § 924(c)(3)(A). of Gill’s Id. arguments at are McNeal, we affirm his convictions and sentence. 153. Thus, foreclosed by We deny Gill’s pro se motion to amend and dispense with oral argument as the appeal facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this Court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 3

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?