United States v. Banks, No. 14-3461 (7th Cir. 2016)
Annotate this CaseBanks was charged based on four separate bank robbery incidents in 2007-2008, all involving the use of a gun. During the four years preceding his trial, Banks terminated his counsel five times. On the first day of trial, Banks’s counsel informed the court that Banks intended to proceed pro se. A colloquy ensued. Banks insisted that the court lacked jurisdiction over him. Counsel agreed to stay in a stand‐by capacity. Banks was informed of the potential penalties he would face if convicted. He confirmed that he intended to represent himself. The court concluded that Banks had knowingly and voluntarily waived his right to counsel. Banks declined to object to the government’s motions in limine, strike any jurors, present witnesses, cross‐examine the government’s witnesses, object to any prosecution questions, or comment on jury instructions. He repeatedly stated that he was “captive” and would not be “partaking in this proceeding,” asked to be excused from attending the trial, and rebuffed suggestions that standby counsel represent him. Banks attempted to make opening and closing statements, but failed to confine his remarks to evidence; the judge cut him off. After he was convicted, Banks escaped from a Chicago jail, rappelling 17 stories down an exterior wall during the night, using bedsheets. After he was apprehended, he consented to representation by counsel, and unsuccessfully moved for a new trial, arguing that he had not knowingly or voluntarily waived his right to counsel. The court sentenced him to 432 months’ imprisonment. The Seventh Circuit affirmed, holding that Banks knowingly waived counsel and that the court adequately explained the sentence.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.