Bank Robbery Defense Lawyer in New York

Evidence in a Federal Bank Robbery Investigation

Bank robbery cases can involve multiple forms of evidence collected by federal and local investigators.

That may include surveillance video, witness identifications, demand notes, fingerprints, DNA or other laboratory evidence, cell-phone or location data, vehicle information, financial records, statements, and evidence recovered during searches.

The defense can examine both what the evidence appears to show and how it was obtained.

Potential issues may include identification reliability, forensic testing, chain of custody, search warrants, interrogations, probable cause, and whether evidence was collected in compliance with constitutional and procedural requirements.

Steven B. Epstein is a founding partner of the firm and serves on the New York State Commission on Forensic Science. The Commission is involved in standards, accreditation, quality assurance, and methodologies used by public forensic laboratories throughout New York. That work adds another perspective to the firm's evaluation of cases involving scientific evidence.

A Firearm Charge Can Create Separate Federal Exposure

A bank robbery involving a firearm can raise issues beyond § 2113 itself.

Depending on the conduct alleged and the offenses charged, federal prosecutors may bring a separate count under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) for qualifying firearm conduct connected to a crime of violence.

When § 924(c) applies, the statute contains mandatory minimum prison terms. The minimum is generally five years for qualifying use, carrying, or possession, seven years when the firearm is brandished, and ten years when it is discharged.

A § 924(c) prison term must run consecutively to the sentence imposed for the underlying qualifying offense rather than at the same time.

That means firearm allegations require analysis of both the underlying bank robbery charge and any separate federal weapons count.

Our firm also handles firearm and weapon charges in state and federal matters.

Aiding & Abetting, Lookouts & Other Alleged Roles

Federal criminal liability does not necessarily depend on being the person who physically entered the bank.

A person accused of intentionally assisting the commission of an offense may face liability under federal aiding-and-abetting principles when the government can prove the required elements.

That can make evidence about planning, communications, transportation, alleged lookout activity, or assistance during the offense important.

Those allegations should not be confused with § 2113(c), which separately addresses certain possession or handling of property stolen in violation of § 2113(b).

The government still has to prove the legal theory charged against each defendant.

What Happens in an EDNY or SDNY Bank Robbery Case?

A federal bank robbery matter may begin before an arrest.

Investigators may conduct interviews, review surveillance, execute search warrants, obtain digital records, or present evidence in a grand-jury investigation. In other cases, an arrest occurs quickly after the alleged robbery.

After a federal arrest, the defendant generally appears before a federal magistrate judge. The court addresses issues that can include counsel, detention or release, and the next procedural steps.

A case may proceed through a criminal complaint, grand-jury indictment, discovery, motion practice, negotiations, and trial.

Our attorneys represent clients in federal criminal matters in New York, including cases arising in the Eastern and Southern Districts.

John H. LoTurco is a former major-offense prosecutor whose background includes federal criminal defense and documented acquittals and dismissals in matters in the Eastern District of New York.

How Federal Sentencing Works After a Bank Robbery Conviction

The statutory maximum is only one part of federal sentencing.

Federal judges also calculate an advisory range under the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and consider the sentencing factors required by federal law.

For a § 2113(a) bank robbery, the robbery guideline can take into account factors such as the financial institution involved, weapon conduct, threats, injury, physical restraint, the value of property taken or damaged, and other offense characteristics. The defendant's criminal history also affects the eventual Guideline calculation.

The Guidelines are advisory rather than a substitute for the statutory sentencing process, and the applicable calculation depends on the facts, counts of conviction, and version of the Guidelines Manual that governs the sentencing.

Separate mandatory statutes can also matter. For example, a qualifying § 924(c) conviction requires a consecutive term that is added to the punishment for the underlying offense.

Because federal sentencing can change substantially based on charging decisions and factual findings, it should be evaluated from the actual indictment and evidence rather than from a generic penalty chart.

Why Barket Epstein Handles High-Stakes Federal Defense as a Team

Federal criminal defense is one of the areas in which our firm's structure matters.

Our attorneys bring backgrounds from prosecution, public defense, private criminal defense, and the bench. Instead of relying on one perspective, our team can evaluate charging issues, evidence, federal motion practice, negotiations, trial strategy, and sentencing from different angles.

Bruce A. Barket received the 2020 Charles F. Crimi Memorial Award from the New York State Bar Association's Criminal Justice Section, an award recognizing a private criminal defense career that embodies the section's highest ideals.

Our attorneys have also handled federal cases ranging from fraud and narcotics matters to racketeering, violent crimes, and other serious allegations.

We pair that experience with direct communication. We explain what the evidence shows, identify difficult issues when they exist, and help clients understand the risks and options before major decisions are made.