433 F. App'x 831
11th Cir.2011Background
- Bone appeals convictions for bank robbery, Hobbs Act robbery, and two counts of 924(c) with a 461-month total sentence; affirmance requested.
- District court denied suppression; aunt Tamatha allowed search of spare bedroom used by Bone; keys to robbed bank found in room.
- Bone contends he had privacy interests in the bedroom; government must show consent from person with authority.
- District court denied severance; joinder permitted; jury instructed to consider counts separately.
- Hobbs Act robbery: government must show minimal effect on interstate commerce; evidence showed a nominal but adequate effect.
- Sentencing: two separate 924(c) offenses yielded consecutive sentences; court allowed multiple consecutive terms under governing precedent; sovereignty declaration lawfully considered at sentencing.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Was suppression denial proper based on third-party common authority? | Bone | Bone | Denied; Tamatha had common authority to consent. |
| Was severance proper given joinder of bank and Hobbs Act robberies? | Bone | Bone | Denied; no compelling prejudice; proper sequencing and instructions. |
| Was there sufficient evidence of interstate commerce effect under Hobbs Act? | Bone | Bone | Sufficient minimal effect shown; jury could find interstate commerce impact. |
| Are multiple 924(c) offenses admissible as separate consecutive sentences? | Bone | Bone | Affirmed; multiple consecutive sentences permissible for multiple 924(c) offenses. |
| Did considering Bone's declaration of sovereignty at sentencing constitute plain error? | Bone | Bone | Not plain error; statements admissible as sentencing evidence; proper considerations under 3553(a). |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Walser, 3 F.3d 380 (11th Cir. 1993) (severance standard; no prejudicial abuse shown)
- United States v. Tate, 586 F.3d 936 (11th Cir. 2009) (multiple 924(c) sentences permissible)
- United States v. Wright, 33 F.3d 1349 (11th Cir. 1994) (one term for each 924(c) offense)
- Stirone v. United States, 361 U.S. 212 (1960) (minimal effect on commerce suffices for jurisdiction)
- United States v. Gray, 260 F.3d 1267 (11th Cir. 2001) (business disruption supports interstate commerce impact)
- United States v. Rodriguez, 218 F.3d 1243 (11th Cir. 2000) (sufficiency of evidence on Hobbs Act commerce element)