United States v. Corley Smith
697 F.3d 625
7th Cir.2012Background
- Corley Smith and Kim Evans were charged with bank robbery and using a firearm in furtherance of a crime of violence; Evans also faced felon-in-possession charges; Swanson pled guilty and cooperated.
- Swanson testified that Evans and Smith planned and executed the robbery at Fifth Third Bank in Evanston, with Evans wielding a gun and both escaping in a green Cadillac.
- FBI surveillance linked the green Cadillac to the alleged robbers and informed officers that the group was armed and dangerous; a briefing followed with updates describing the suspects’ clothing and number.
- Evans and Smith were detained after the Cadillac was observed returning to the area; Evans fled, collided with an FBI vehicle, and was arrested; Smith was handcuffed and searched at the scene.
- Evidence recovered included a gun, masks, gloves, and footwear that matched the robbers’ descriptions; Smith moved to suppress statements and physical evidence, which the district court denied.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether search of the Cadillac was lawful | Smith and Evans contend lack of probable cause. | Government asserts vehicle search incident to arrest and inevitable discovery/causation. | Cadillac search lawful; probable cause and inevitable-discovery doctrine supported admission. |
| Whether Smith’s initial encounter was an arrest or a Terry stop | Stop transformed into arrest; suppress evidence. | Initial contact was a lawful investigative stop; arrest occurred after photos confirmed identity. | Initial encounter was a Terry stop; arrest followed upon corroboration; evidence admissible. |
| Admissibility of FBI Examiner Smith’s footwear-impression testimony | Footwear-analysis not reliable per Rule 702/Daubert. | Methodology is widely used and peer-reviewed; admissible. | Testimony admissible under Rule 702; four-step methodology reliable and generally accepted. |
| Sufficiency of the evidence for Smith’s 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) conviction | Insufficient evidence that Smith aided/abetted or foreseen gun use. | Foreseeability and aiding-and-abetting theory support conviction. | Evidence sufficient; co-conspirator’s use reasonably foreseeable and aiding/abetting established. |
| Whether the sentence enhancements for death threat and bodily injury were proper | Enhancements baseless if Smith lacked knowledge of gun or intent to threaten. | District court reasonably inferred foreseeability and participation. | Enhancements affirmed; not clearly erroneous given the robbery’s conduct. |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Walker, 237 F.3d 845 (7th Cir. 2001) (vehicle stop framework)
- Arizona v. Gant, 556 U.S. 332 (U.S. 2009) (probable-cause vehicle searches incident to arrest)
- United States v. Stotler, 591 F.3d 935 (7th Cir. 2010) (inventory search admissibility; inevitable-discovery)
- United States v. Clinton, 591 F.3d 968 (7th Cir. 2010) (inventory searches; admissibility)
- Tilmon, 19 F.3d 1221 (7th Cir. 1994) (guns drawn during Terry stop permissible)
- United States v. Maiden, 606 F.3d 337 (7th Cir. 2010) (sentencing enhancements; foreseeability)
- United States v. Williams, 553 F.3d 1073 (7th Cir. 2009) (sentencing enhancements; foreseeability)
- United States v. Moore, 572 F.3d 334 (7th Cir. 2009) (aiding and abetting standard)
- United States v. Vasquez, 909 F.2d 235 (7th Cir. 1990) (standard for sufficiency review)
- United States v. Allen, 390 F.3d 944 (7th Cir. 2004) (admissibility of footwear-impression testimony)
- United States v. Atwater, 272 F.3d 511 (7th Cir. 2001) (foreseeability of gun use in robbery)