United States v. Rita Darlene Brown

Brown appeals from an order denying her motion to correct her sentence under Rule 35 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. Pursuant to a plea bargain, Brown pleaded guilty to one count of bank robbery, charging violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2113 (a), and one firearm count, charging violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924 (c). She was sentenced to 20 years’ imprisonment on the bank robbery charge and to an additional five years on the firearm charge, the sentences to run consecutively. She argues that Simpson v. United States, 435 U.S. 6 , 98 S.Ct. 909 , 55 L.Ed.2d 70 (1978) prohibits sentencing her under both section 2113(a) and section 924(c). We disagree.

The issue in Simpson was “whether §§ 2113(d) and 924(c) should be construed as intended by Congress to authorize, in the case of a bank robbery committed with firearms, not only the imposition of the increased penalty under § 2113(d), but also the imposition of an additional consecutive penalty under § 924(c).” ( 435 U.S. at 8 , 98 S.Ct. at 910-11 .) The Simpson Court answered the question negatively because identical proof was required to support a conviction under section 2113(d) and section 924(c). To prove a violation of section…