U.S. v. Seals

In prosecution on armed bank robbery and firearm possession charges, Dist. Ct. did not abuse its discretion in admitting evidence surrounding recovery of mask containing defendant’s DNA at location near another bank that occurred approximately one month after charged bank robbery. Defendant argued that although mask itself could be admitted into evidence to establish his identity, officer could not make references to nearby bank and its tellers because said testimony had no other purpose than to show that he had propensity to commit bank robberies. However, Ct. found that any error was harmless with respect to firearm possession charge, where defendant had admitted that he loaded gun that was found at scene of charged bank robbery. Moreover, record contained strong evidence to support defendant’s guilt on bank robbery charges, where: (1) witness placed defendant with others near scene of bank robbery shortly after said robbery had taken place, when accomplice handed witness bag containing money and cell phone taken during bank robbery; and (2) defendant’s DNA was found on inside of gun used at said robbery. Dist. Ct. erred, though, in sentencing defendant to 272-month term of incarceration based in part on two enhancements related to car chase that took place one month after charged offense, where Dist. Ct. failed to make any finding relating car chase to charged offenses.