Narrative Opinion Summary
Robert S. Wylie pled guilty to armed bank robbery and using a firearm in a crime of violence. He received a 117-month sentence and appealed, arguing that the district court erred in classifying him as more than a minor participant in the offense. The court found that Wylie, along with co-defendant Michael Williams, participated in the robbery where Williams wielded a gun and commanded bank staff, while Wylie took money and a dye pack from the tellers. Wylie was apprehended the following day with red-stained money in his possession. The appellate court upheld the district court's determination, concluding it did not clearly err in denying Wylie's claim of being a minor participant. The sentence was affirmed without oral argument, as the facts and legal issues were sufficiently presented in the submitted materials.
Legal Issues Addressed
Appellate Review of Sentencing Determinationssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The appellate court reviewed the district court's decision and determined there was no clear error in the denial of Wylie's claim of being a minor participant, affirming the sentence.
Reasoning: The appellate court upheld the district court's determination, concluding it did not clearly err in denying Wylie's claim of being a minor participant.
Classification of Minor Participant in Criminal Offensesubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The appellate court upheld the district court's classification of Wylie as more than a minor participant based on his active involvement in the armed bank robbery.
Reasoning: The court found that Wylie, along with co-defendant Michael Williams, participated in the robbery where Williams wielded a gun and commanded bank staff, while Wylie took money and a dye pack from the tellers.
Disposition Without Oral Argumentsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The appellate court decided the case without oral argument, finding that the written record was sufficient to resolve the issues presented.
Reasoning: The sentence was affirmed without oral argument, as the facts and legal issues were sufficiently presented in the submitted materials.