Document: 352 U.S. 322 77 S.Ct. 403 1 L.Ed.2d 370 Ollie Otto PRINCE, Petitioner,v.UNITED STATES of America. No. 132. Argued Dec. 11, 1956. Decided Feb. 25, 1957. Mr. Joseph P. Jenkins, Kansas City, Kan., for the petitioner. Beatrice Rosenberg, Washington, D.C., respondent. Chief Justice WARREN delivered opinion Court. The question presented by this case calls interpretation Federal Bank Robbery Act. 18 U.S.C. § 2113, U.S.C.A. 2113.1 That statute creates and defines several crimes incidental to related thefts from banks organized or insured under federal laws. Included are bank robbery entering a with intent commit robbery.2 We must decide here whether unlawful entry two offenses consecutively punishable in typical situation. 2 Petitioner entered Malone State Bank, Malone, Texas, through an open door during regular banking hours. He asked received certain directions. Thereupon he displayed revolver, intimidating employee putting his life jeopardy, thus consummated robbery. A grand jury returned two-count indictment against him. first charged offense; second, felony. was convicted on both counts, district judge sentenced him 20 years 15 entering. sentences were directed be served consecutively. Some thereafter, petitioner filed 'Motion Vacate Correct Illegal Sentence.' District Court, treating it as proceeding Rule 35 Rules Criminal Procedure, denied relief without conducting hearing. Court Appeals Fifth Circuit affirmed. 230 F.2d 568. 3 Whether crime is merged when latter has puzzled courts years. conflict arisen between circuits.3 granted certiorari because recurrence resolve conflict. 351 962, 76 1034, 100 L.Ed. 1482. In addition cases precise question, Government cite analogous other that involved fragmentation purposes punishment.4 None these particularly helpful us we dealing unique limited purpose inconclusive legislative history. It can should differentiated similar problems general raised statutes. narrow one, our decision correspondingly narrow. 4 original Act passed 1934. 48 Stat. 783. covered only robbery, accompanied aggravated assault, homicide perpetrated committing escaping thereafter. 1937 Attorney General requested amended. letter proposing bill, declared 'incongruous results' had developed existing law. cited striking instance 5 '* * man (who) arrested national while walking out building $11,000 bank's funds person. managed gain possession money momentary absence one employees, displaying any force violence anyone fear—necessary elements robbery—and about leave apprehended. As result, not practicable prosecute statute.' 6 amended accordingly add less serious than Two larceny provisions enacted: property exceeding $50, lesser amounts. Congress further made 7 enter attempt *, such building, part thereof, so used, felony *.' 8 Robbery, all placed paragraph Act.5 9 provided maximum penalties either prison term fine each offenses. remained $5,000. set according degree offense. Simple could result year jail $1,000 fine, more theft at 10 No separate penalty clause added unlawfully simply incorporated into provision.6 asks interpret make completely independent unnecessary do order vindicate apparent amendment. factor stressed possibility thief might manifestly establish But doing there no indication intended also pyramid penalties. 11 situation illustrate position. highly unlikely would have wanted offender given plus steal. There reason suppose wished doubled imposition which bank.7 Nor anything reports House Representatives Senate floor debates warrant reading statute.8 12 fair inference wording Act, uncontradicted meager history, provision inserted cover where person enters crime, but frustrated some before completing crime. gravamen offense act entering, satisfies terms even if open, public normal business hours.9 Rather heart This mental element merges completed consummated. To go beyond reasoning compel find intended, amendment, drastic changes authorized punishments. cannot do. If been accomplished easily certainty rather indirection.10 13 hold, therefore, punishment remain years,11 that, culprit fall short accomplishing purpose, imprisoned felonious intent. 14 While reasonable minds differ conclusion, think consistent policy attributing Congress, enactment criminal statutes, intention punish severely language its laws clearly imports light pertinent judgment reversed remanded resentencing accordance opinion. 16 Reversed remanded. 17 BURTON dissents reasons stated Appeals, Cir., BLACK took consideration case. '(a) Whoever, violence, intimidation, takes, attempts take, presence another thing value belonging to, care, custody, control, management, of, bank, savings loan association; 'Whoever association, used whole affecting association violation United States, larceny— 'Shall fined $5,000 twenty years, both. '(b) Whoever takes carries away, steal purloin, $100 shall ten both; year, '(d) committing, attempting commit, defined subsections (a) (b) section, assaults person, puts jeopardy use dangerous weapon device, $10,000 twenty-five both.' opinion, 'robbery' 'larceny' refer common-law crimes, accord own earlier ruling Durrett v. 107 438, Rawls 162 798, decided Tenth Circuit. Another affirmed consecutive Wells 124 334. However, prisoner, appearing pro se, merger proceeding. When tried later, court held barred ground making second motion 28 2255, behalf same prisoner. 210 112. Finally sought remedy writ habeas corpus, Ninth concluded 2255 proceedings precluded jurisdiction. Madigan Wells, 224 577, reversing Swope, 121 F.Supp. 718. Contrary Circuits determinations Sixth Simunov 314, supra. effect dicta cases. supra, page 578; Barkdoll 147 617. States Michener, 331 789, 67 1509, 91 1818; Raynor, 302 540, 58 353, 82 413; Blockburger 284 299, 52 180, 306; Adams, 281 202, 50 269, 74 807; Albrecht 273 1, 47 250, 71 505; Morgan Devine, 237 632, 712, 59 1153; Gavieres 220 338, 31 421, 55 489; Burton 202 344, 26 688, 1057; Carter McClaughry, 183 365, 22 181, 46 236. See Bell 349 81, 75 620, 99 905; Universal C.I.T. Credit Corp., 344 218, 73 227, 97 260; Ebeling Morgan, 625, 710, 1151; Daugherty, 269 360, 156, 70 309. appeared (1946 ed.) 588b(a). present form enacted June 1948 revision. 2113(a), 2113(a). history indicates substantial change segregated 2113(b), leaving note has, since 1934, contained special increased One who, 25 entry, subject aggravating circumstances. currently found 2113(d), 2113(d). Under government view, carried logical extreme, who commits entry. conceded error Heflin 223 371 (robbery larceny). now declares confession mistake rebbery offenses, cumulatively punishable. H.R.Rep. 732, 75th Cong., 1st Sess.; S.Rep. 1259, 81 Cong.Rec. 2731, 4656, 5376—5377, 9331. distinguishes very relating post-office 2115, 2115: forcibly breaks break post office, depredation, (Italics supplied.) section create theft. 1153. Further evidence concerned proscribing additional activities alteration scheme revealed bill cast. Introduced Representatives, proposal merely interjected clauses criminal. H.R. 5900, Sess. 2. All three violators clause. During debate floor, Rep. Wolcott pointed incongruity establishing degrees corresponding discrimination punishment. 4656. Committee Judiciary then provide punishments 5376—5377. accepted version debate. 9331; see case, assault deadly 6,

Category: 0