State v. Kelvin Williams (071306), 218 N.J. 576

On Oct. 8, 2008 Kelvin Williams entered a Sun National Bank teller area wearing loose clothing (bright orange pants, oversized t‑shirt, camouflage hooded sweatshirt with hood up) and told the head teller he had a bomb and demanded millions of dollars. The teller did not see a bomb; defendant’s hands and torso were not visible.
The teller, frightened and concerned for a nearby pregnant employee, handed over $552 and later called 9‑1‑1; Williams fled by cab and was arrested nearby after purchasing clothes at a mall to change out of the items seized by police. No bomb or weapon was recovered.
Williams was convicted by a jury of first‑degree robbery (robbery elevated for being armed with or threatening immediate use of a deadly weapon) and sentenced to 14 years with an 85% parole‑ineligibility period.
The Appellate Division reversed, holding the evidence was insufficient because there was no gesture or object simulating a weapon and clothing alone was irrelevant absent a statement the bomb was on his body.
The State sought and the New Jersey Supreme Court granted certification; the Supreme Court considered whether a verbal bomb threat alone (absent a gesture) can support a first‑degree robbery conviction under the totality‑of‑the‑circumstances standard.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether a simulated‑weapon robbery conviction requires a physical gesture in addition to a verbal bomb threat	State: No; for bombs a gesture is not necessary — words, clothing, conduct and contemporary knowledge that bombs can be concealed can make the threat reasonable	Williams: Yes; precedent requires a gesture or object in simulated‑weapon cases — verbal threat alone insufficient	Court: No gesture is required; victim must have an actual and reasonable belief based on totality of circumstances (words, conduct, dress, other factors)
Whether evidence here was sufficient for first‑degree robbery	State: Teller’s testimony about threat, defendant’s loose, concealing clothing, concealment of hands, and her fear support a reasonable belief he had a bomb	Williams: Teller’s subjective belief was unreasonable absent a gesture or object simulating a bomb	Court: Sufficient — a reasonable jury could find the teller actually and reasonably believed Williams possessed a bomb given his words, clothing, conduct, and contemporaneous knowledge that bombs can be concealed

State v. Chapland, 187 N.J. 275 (2006) (unequivocal or equivocal gestures plus threatening words can support simulated‑weapon first‑degree robbery)
State v. Hutson, 107 N.J. 222 (1987) (victim must have an actual, reasonable belief under the circumstances to treat a feigned object as a deadly weapon)
State v. LaFrance, 224 N.J. Super. 364 (App. Div. 1988) (hand‑gesture simulating a gun supported first‑degree robbery conviction)
State v. Huff, 292 N.J. Super. 185 (App. Div. 1996) (defendant’s patting of waistband coupled with words supported reasonable belief in a concealed gun)
State v. Butler, 89 N.J. 220 (1982) (earlier interpretation before statutory amendment regarding simulated weapons)
United States v. Diehl‑Armstrong, 739 F. Supp. 2d 786 (W.D. Pa.) (2010) (factual example of a bomb affixed to a robber’s neck/torso; used to illustrate contemporary awareness of concealed explosive devices)