Opinion ID: 4536265
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 7

Heading: bank robbery was properly charged and

Text: INSTRUCTED AS A “CRIME OF VIOLENCE” UNDER 18 U.S.C. § 924(C) Wilson and Moore were each convicted of two counts of brandishing a gun “during and in relation to” a “crime of violence” under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A)(ii). They argue that their crimes are not crimes of violence under that statute, and that the jury instructions on those counts were improper. The first objection is a nonstarter. We have recently held that armed bank robbery is categorically a crime of violence under § 924(c)(3)’s elements clause. United States v. Johnson, 899 F.3d 191, 204 (3d Cir. 2018). Wilson and Moore’s challenge to the jury instruction likewise fails. They argue that the District Court should not have instructed the jury that conspiracy (or perhaps conspiracy to commit bank robbery) counts as a crime of violence. But even if that is right, it gets them nowhere. The District Court instructed the jury that either conspiracy or armed bank robbery would count as a predicate crime for a § 924(c) conviction, as 23 long as the jury found that the defendant had used or carried the gun to further the crime. Wilson App. 1546. And the jury convicted both defendants on both bank-robbery counts. So the instruction about conspiracy did not matter. Even if it was erroneous, any error was harmless. See United States v. Waller, 654 F.3d 430, 434 (3d Cir. 2011).