United States v. Steve Smith, 950 F.3d 893

Smith and Lionell were indicted for bank robbery and conspiracy to commit bank robbery after two attempted robberies at BB&T and Capital One in January 2016.
In both banks they used demand notes and oral commands; one defendant distracted a teller while the other handed a note reading “Give me all your money,” and at the second bank a teller was ordered to keep her hands in the air.
Both attempts yielded no money; tellers testified they were scared and froze or complied with commands.
A jury convicted both defendants of conspiracy to commit bank robbery by intimidation; the substantive robbery counts resulted in acquittal for Smith and a deadlock for Lionell.
Defendants appealed, arguing the government’s evidence was insufficient to prove a conspiracy to rob by intimidation; the court reviewed sufficiency de novo under Jackson v. Virginia.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the evidence was sufficient to support convictions for conspiracy to commit bank robbery by intimidation	Gov’t: Defendants’ coordinated conduct (notes, commands, control of teller movements, and tellers’ fear) permits an inference of agreement to intimidate	Smith/Lionell: Their tone was conversational, no weapon, no explicit threats or gestures, so conduct did not amount to intimidation or agreement to intimidate	Affirmed: Jury could rationally find an agreement to rob by intimidation based on notes, commands, efforts to control tellers, and teller testimony of fear
Whether calm demeanor and absence of a weapon/explicit threats preclude finding of intimidation	Gov’t: Intimidation can be implied from demands plus conduct reasonably likely to create fear; victim perception is probative	Defs: Polite tone and lack of weapons/ threats undermine any claim of intimidation	Rejected: Court followed circuit and sister-circuit precedent holding that polite or calm manner and lack of weapon do not preclude intimidation when demands and control create fear

Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (1979) (standard for reviewing sufficiency of evidence)
United States v. Wahl, 290 F.3d 370 (D.C. Cir. 2002) (applying Jackson standard)
United States v. Gatling, 96 F.3d 1511 (D.C. Cir. 1996) (elements of conspiracy)
Iannelli v. United States, 420 U.S. 770 (1975) (agreement may be proved by inference from conduct)
United States v. Carr, 946 F.3d 598 (D.C. Cir. 2020) (definition of intimidation)
United States v. Gilmore, 282 F.3d 398 (6th Cir. 2002) (notes + commands can imply threat and support robbery conviction)
United States v. Clark, 227 F.3d 771 (7th Cir. 2000) (victim fear probative; polite demeanor does not preclude intimidation)
United States v. Hill, 187 F.3d 698 (7th Cir. 1999) (victim’s perception relevant to objective intimidation inquiry)
United States v. McCarty, 36 F.3d 1349 (5th Cir. 1994) (notes alone can support robbery by intimidation)
United States v. Graham, 931 F.2d 1442 (11th Cir. 1991) (affirming conviction despite polite language and lack of weapon)