Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-92-01174/USCOURTS-ca10-92-01174-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Billy Eli Garduno
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

FIL ., .J 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEAL8t.J 'ted States Coi."c. of Appeal~ ni Tenth Circuit 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v. 

BILLY ELI GARDUNO, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

TENTH CIRCUIT 

FEB 2 5 1993 

ROBERT L. HOECKER 

Clerk 

No. 92-1174 

(D.C. No. 91-CR-375) 

(D. Colo.) 

ORDER AND JUDGMENT* 

Before McKAY, Chief Judge, McWILLIAMS, Senior Circuit Judge, and 

SAFFELS, Senior District Judge . ** 

In a one-count indictment, Billy Eli Garduno was charged with 

bank robbery, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a) (Supp. 1992) . 

Specifically, Garduno was charqed with knowingly taking "by force 

and violence, or by intimidation" money belonging to the Vectra 

Bank of Federal Heights, Colorado, a federally insured bank, from 

the person and presence of one of its employees, in violation of 

18 U.S.C. § 2113(a ) . Over the government's objection, the jury 

was instructed not only on bank robbery (18 U.S.C. § 2113 (a)), but 

* This order and judgment has no precedential value and shall 

not be cited, or used by any court within the Tenth Circuit, ex- cept for purposes of establishing the doctrines of the law of the 

case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. 10th Cir. R. 36.3 . 

** Honorable Dale E. Saffels, Senior District Judge for the District of Kansas, sitting by designation. 

Appellate Case: 92-1174 Document: 010110176466 Date Filed: 02/25/1993 Page: 1 
also on bank larceny (18 U.S.C. § 2113(b)). The jury convicted 

Garduno on bank robbery, and he was sentenced under United States 

Sentencing Guidelines, § 2B3.1, to imprisonment for 51 months, 

followed by three years of supervised release, plus an order that 

he pay Vectra Bank $1.04 as restitution. Garduno appeals both his 

conviction and the sentence imposed thereon. 

At the close of the government's case, defense counsel moved 

for a judgment of acquittal under Fed . R. Crim. P. 29, arguing 

that although there was sufficient evidence to show a bank larceny, as defined in 18 U.S.C. § 2113(b), the evidence was insufficient to show, even prima facie, bank robbery, as defined in 18 

u.s.c. § 2113 (a) . Specifically, counsel argued that the 

government's evidence was insufficient to show that Garduno took 

money belonging to Vectra Bank from its employee "by force and 

violence, or by intimidation," as required by 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a) . 

The district court denied this motion. 

On appeal, Garduno's counsel argues that the district court 

erred in denying Garduno's motion under Fed. R. Crim. P. 29 for 

1 acquittal of the bank ro~bery charge. We find no error. A brief 

recital of the government's evidence will put this matter in focus . 

Garduno, wearing a blue and white bandanna, which covered his 

head and the top of his forehead, approached Lee Ann Coburn, a 

teller at the Vectra Bank of Federal Heights, placed a brown paper 

1 After the district court denied Garduno's motion for a judgment of acquittal, Garduno called no witnesses and the case was 

submitted to the jury. 

-2-

Appellate Case: 92-1174 Document: 010110176466 Date Filed: 02/25/1993 Page: 2 
bag on the counter, and said, "I have a gun, put all of the money 

in the bag, all of it, and you have twenty seconds." Garduno then 

began counting backwards from twenty. Ms. Coburn picked up the 

brown paper bag and began filling it with currency from the teller 

drawer. In so doing, she pulled bait money from her drawer which 

activated a surveillance camera and the silent alarm. When 

Garduno reached eight or nine in his counting down , Ms. Coburn 

handed him the brown paper bag, which it was later determined contained $1,603. Garduno took the bag and walked out of the bank. 

After leaving the bank, Garduno went to a nearby field. He 

hid the blue and white bandanna and the red windbreaker he was 

wearing behind a tree . He then proceeded to a nearby gas station, 

which is where he was waiting for a taxi when he was arrested by 

the police. All but $1.04 of the $1,603 taken from the bank was 

recovered. No weapon was ever found. 

Ms . Coburn, the teller, was approximately 23 years of age and 

had worked for the bank approximately 18 months. She testified 

that she attempted to follow the rules given her by the bank concerning what she should qo when confronted with a situation of 

this sort . However, she stated she forgot to put a dye pack into 

Garduno's bag because she was too nervous and afraid, and she 

thought Garduno might count to "zero" before she had a chance to 

give him all of her money . After Garduno left the bank, Ms. 

Coburn said she began to cry. 

We think the foregoing summary of the government's evidence 

demonstrates that there is sufficient evidence to show that in 

getting the money from Ms . Coburn, Garduno used, at the very 

-3-

Appellate Case: 92-1174 Document: 010110176466 Date Filed: 02/25/1993 Page: 3 
least, "intimidation," and more probably used "force and violence. 11 

Recently, we defined "intimidation," as that term is used in 

18 U.S.C. § 2113(a), as "conduct or words . . calculated to ereate the impression that any resistance or defiance by the [individual] would be met by force." United States v. Lajoie, 942 F.2d 

699, 701 n.5 (10th Cir.), cert. denied, 112 s. Ct. 328 (1991) 

(quoting United States v. Jones, 932 F.2d 624, 625 (7th Cir. 

1991)). To determine whether there is sufficient evidence of intimidation to support a conviction for bank robbery, we look at 

the following: "(1) whether the situation appeared dangerous, (2) 

whether the defendant intended to intimidate, and (3) whether the 

bank personnel were reasonable in their fear of death or injury." 

United States v. Slater, 692 F.2d 107, 109 (10th Cir. 1982) (citing United States v . Shannahan, 605 F.2d 539 (10th Cir. 1979)). 

We think the instant case meets the Slater test. Garduno 

told the teller he had a gun. Obviously, that statement created a 

potentially dangerous situation and was certainly intended to intimidate Ms. Coburn. Anq, we believe the circumstances were such 

as would reasonably put Ms. Coburn in fear. We are not here con2 cerned with her degree of fear. 

As indicated, the district court sentenced Garduno pursuant 

to the Sentencing Guidelines, § 2B3.1, which pertains to "Robbery, 

2 In United States v. Alsop, 479 F.2d 65, 67 (9th Cir. 1973), 

the Ninth Circuit stated that under 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a), the "courageousness or the timidity of the victim is irrelevant" and that 

"it is the acts of the accused which constitute an intimidation." 

Otherwise "a fearless banker could never be robbed by intimidation." Id. 

-4-

Appellate Case: 92-1174 Document: 010110176466 Date Filed: 02/25/1993 Page: 4 
Extortion and Blackmail." Garduno's counsel argues that the district court should have sentenced Garduno under§ 2Bl.l, which 

pertains to "Larceny, Embezzlement and Other Forms of Theft . " 

This argument overlooks the fact that Garduno was convicted of 

bank robbery, not bank larceny. Such being the case, the district 

court properly applied§ 2B3 . l . 

Judgment affirmed. 

Entered for the Court 

Robert H. McWilliams 

Senior Circuit Judge 

-5-

- - -- - - -- - --- - --- - - - ~~- - -

Appellate Case: 92-1174 Document: 010110176466 Date Filed: 02/25/1993 Page: 5 
Appellate Case: 92-1174 Document: 010110176466 Date Filed: 02/25/1993 Page: 6