United States v. Armour, No. 15-2170 (7th Cir. 2016)
Annotate this CaseRogers and Hardy hid outside the entrance, then forced a teller into a bank at gunpoint as she was opening the door. Armour directed them by radio from the parking lot. Armour had recruited the two, supplied clothing, reserved their hotel rooms, and orchestrated the plan. When the teller could not open the safe, the two restrained her and stole her car to flee. All three men were arrested quickly; two firearms were found with them. Rogers and Hardy pled guilty. Both testified against Armour, who was convicted of conspiracy to commit armed bank robbery, 18 U.S.C. 371; aiding and abetting attempted armed bank robbery 18 U.S.C. 2113(a); and aiding and abetting using or carrying or brandishing a firearm in relation to a crime of violence 18 U.S.C. 924(c). His 324-month sentence included an 84-month consecutive sentence on the section 924(c) charge, the mandatory minimum for brandishing a firearm. The Seventh Circuit remanded the sentence for the section 924(c) conviction, which was imposed without a jury finding that Armour aided and abetted the “brandishing.” The court rejected an argument that the entire sentence was erroneously based on a finding that Armour was a career offender based on two prior Indiana convictions for robbery and an argument that the section 924(c) conviction must be reversed because the underlying predicate offense, attempted armed bank robbery, should not qualify as a “crime of violence.”
The court issued a subsequent related opinion or order on June 26, 2017.
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.