Skip to main content
Please enter a legal issue and/or a location
Begin typing to search, use arrow keys to navigate, use enter to select

Find a Lawyer

More Options

US v. Haas, No. 08-4012

By FindLaw Staff on October 15, 2010 | Last updated on March 21, 2019

Bank Robbery Conviction Affirmed

In US v. Haas, No. 08-4012, the court affirmed defendant's conviction and sentence for aiding and abetting burglary of a building used in part as a bank, holding that 1) the unambiguous language of 18 U.S.C. section 2113(a) applied to a defendant who took federally insured deposits from a bank-owned and operated ATM located within a store; 2) the district court did not abuse its discretion by excluding evidence about the bank's FDIC insurance; and 3) defendant's earlier burglary conviction was a crime of violence.


As the court wrote:  "Jeffery Haas appeals his conviction following a jury trial on one count of aiding and abetting burglary of a building used in part as a bank in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a). He argues that he was improperly convicted of aiding and abetting bank burglary because the Go America Convenience Store ("Store") is not a bank, and neither the Store nor the Automated Teller Machine ("ATM") located in the Store was insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation ("FDIC"). He also argues that he is entitled to a new trial, as the district court1 committed instructional and evidentiary errors. In addition, he asserts that he is not a career offender for sentencing purposes, and that the alternative sentence on bank theft is unreasonable and based on an improper upward departure. He finally argues that the district court erred in refusing to appoint counsel for him before sentencing. We affirm."

Related Resources

You Don’t Have To Solve This on Your Own – Get a Lawyer’s Help

Meeting with a lawyer can help you understand your options and how to best protect your rights. Visit our attorney directory to find a lawyer near you who can help.

Or contact an attorney near you:
Copied to clipboard