Harris

MEMORANDUM **

Richard Harris appeals his jury conviction for bank robbery in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2113 (a) and the sentence imposed by Judge David A. Ezra of the United States District Court for the District of Hawaii. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and affirm the judgment.

1. Sufficient evidence existed to support the jury’s determination that Harris committed the bank robbery. While identification of the defendant as the perpetrator is always an essential element that the government must prove beyond a reasonable doubt, in-court identification by an eyewitness is not necessarily required, and identity may be inferred from the facts and circumstances in evidence. United States v. Alexander, 48 F.3d 1477, 1490 (9th Cir.1995). Here, the direct and circumstantial evidence—which included positive photo-identification by two eyewitnesses, an in-court identification as the person depicted in the photos selected as representing the perpetrator, Harris’s possession of a bandana identified as that worn by the robber, testimony that Harris twice asked whether a bank teller would hand over money if presented with a demand note, testimony that Harris was not detected when…