U.S. v. Sebetich

Decision Date31 October 1985
Docket Number84-3665 and 84-3685,Nos. 84-3656,s. 84-3656
Citation776 F.2d 412
Parties19 Fed. R. Evid. Serv. 384 UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Franklin Evon SEBETICH a/k/a Frank, Earl Dean, Jr., a/k/a Dooney, Michael John Buhovecky, Appellants.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Third Circuit

John T. Olshock, Thomas J. Graham (argued), Finder, Allison, Olshock and Graham, Washington, Pa., for appellant Dean in No. 84-3656.

George E. Schumacher, Federal Public Defender, Thomas S. White (argued), Asst. Federal Public Defender, Pittsburgh, Pa., for appellant Franklin Sebetich in No. 84-3665.

Thomas J. Michael (argued), Pittsburgh, Pa., for appellant Buhovecky in No. 84-3685.

J. Alan Johnson, U.S. Atty., Paul J. Brysh (argued), Asst. U.S. Atty., Pittsburgh, Pa., for appellee.

Before HIGGINBOTHAM and BECKER, Circuit Judges, and LACEY, District Judge *.

OPINION OF THE COURT

BECKER, Circuit Judge.

This is a consolidated appeal by three defendants from judgments of conviction on charges arising out of three bank robberies. Appellant Franklin E. Sebetich was indicted on charges of robbing the Cal-Ed Federal Credit Union in California, Pennsylvania; of robbing a branch of Equibank in Finleyville, Pennsylvania; of robbing the Union National Bank of Pittsburgh in Bentleyville, Pennsylvania; and of placing the lives of tellers in jeopardy during the commission of these robberies. Sebetich was convicted of Counts II and III of the charges arising out of the Cal-Ed robbery and sentenced to twenty years' imprisonment. Appellant Michael John Buhovecky was indicted on charges of robbing the Union National Bank branch in Bentleyville and of placing the lives of the bank's tellers in jeopardy. Buhovecky was convicted on both counts and sentenced to twenty years' imprisonment. Appellant Earl Dean, Jr., was indicted on charges of participating in all three robberies and of placing the lives of tellers in jeopardy in connection therewith. Dean was convicted of the charges involving the Bentleyville and Finleyville banks and sentenced to two concurrent twenty-year terms of imprisonment. All three appellants were also indicted on charges of conspiring to rob federally insured banks and credit unions. Buhovecky and Dean were convicted of that charge and sentenced to five years' imprisonment each, to run concurrently with their other sentences. 1

The appellants raise a host of issues, including an attack on the sufficiency of the indictment, a contention that there was unconstitutional pre-indictment delay, a claim of illegal search and seizure, and a variety of attacks upon the district court's evidentiary and procedural rulings at trial. For the reasons that follow, we reject all but three of these arguments. Because we conclude that the district court erroneously rejected Sebetich's proffer of expert testimony on the subject of the reliability of eyewitness identification, we vacate the judgment of conviction against Sebetich on the charge of robbing the Cal-Ed bank, and remand so that the district court may hold a hearing in accordance with our opinion in United States v. Downing, 753 F.2d 1224 (3d Cir.1985). We affirm the convictions of Buhovecky with respect to the Bentleyville robbery, but reverse Buhovecky's conviction for conspiracy, instruct the district court to enter a judgment of acquittal with respect to that count, and remand for resentencing on the remaining bank robbery counts. 2 Finally, we affirm the convictions of Dean on the counts relating to the Bentleyville robbery and the conspiracy count, but we vacate the judgments of conviction against him on charges stemming from the Finleyville robbery and remand for further fact-finding concerning the seizure of physical evidence linking Dean to that robbery. If the district court determines that no constitutional infirmity barred admission of the evidence, it will reinstate this conviction.

I. FACTS

Between the months of March and August 1979, two banks and a federal credit union located in three neighboring western Pennsylvania communities were robbed by men wearing ski masks. The evidence adduced at trial concerning these robberies is essentially as follows.

A. The Cal-Ed Robbery. The first of the three robberies occurred on March 28, 1979, when a man with a gun robbed the Cal-Ed Credit Union. Immediately after the robber left the scene, a call was made to Officer Charles Filoni of the California, Pennsylvania Police Department, stating that the robber had fled in a dark green pick-up truck. Filoni responded to the call and spotted a truck, matching this description, with a driver and one passenger. Filoni testified that he pursued the truck, and that, when his police cruiser was fifteen to twenty feet behind the truck, the passenger extended his upper body out of the window and pointed a semiautomatic pistol at him. Filoni ducked; the passenger fired; the bullet penetrated Filoni's windshield and lodged in the headrest. A fragment of the bullet pierced Filoni's left shoulder.

After Filoni had continued the chase for twenty-two miles, he lost and never regained sight of the truck. According to Filoni, during the chase the passenger leaned out of the window approximately eight more times and fired four to five more shots. At trial, Filoni estimated that he had viewed the passenger for a total of forty-nine seconds at distances of about thirty to forty yards, and at speeds ranging from forty to seventy-five miles per hour. Immediately following the incident, Filoni described the passenger as having light brown thick wavy hair, long sideburns, a full but closely cropped beard, and a thin mustache.

The Cal-Ed robbers made good their escape, and the police and FBI remained without a suspect for approximately a year and a half. In September or October of 1980, Officer Filoni noticed a photograph on the bulletin board at the police station and spontaneously identified it as that of the man who had fired at him during the chase following the robbery. The photograph, which was of appellant Sebetich, showed a man without a beard or mustache and with dark, straight hair. It had been taken in 1971, about nine years before the robbery.

In December of 1980, Agent Scupien of the FBI showed Filoni a photo spread containing the picture of Sebetich that had been posted on the bulletin board. Filoni once again identified Sebetich as the Cal-Ed robber. He also identified, with some reservation, a picture of appellant Dean, referring to him as the driver of the green get-away truck. Over Sebetich's objections, evidence of Filoni's two out-of-court identifications was admitted at trial. Filoni also made an in-court identification of Sebetich as the passenger in the green truck who had fired at him. Additionally, Filoni testified concerning his out-of-court identification of Dean and made an in-court identification of Dean as the driver of the truck.

B. The Bentleyville Robbery. On May 17, 1979, two armed men robbed the Union National Bank in Bentleyville, Pennsylvania. After leaving the bank, they escaped in a yellow American Motors Gremlin that was parked in an alley across the street. A third accomplice, who had been waiting in the car, drove it about a mile and a half outside the business area of Bentleyville to the Chippewa Golf Course. There all three abandoned the Gremlin and continued their escape in a second getaway car driven by a fourth man.

On July 12 or 13, 1979, William Stankovich, Chief of the Bentleyville Police Department, was patrolling near appellant Buhovecky's residence when, according to Stankovich's trial testimony, Buhovecky approached him and asked how much money had been taken in the Bentleyville robbery. Stankovich told him the amount, and Buhovecky seemed surprised. Stankovich testified that on the 16th or 17th of the same month he encountered Buhovecky in the parking lot of the American Legion Post in Bentleyville, and that Buhovecky requested a meeting with the FBI or the state police to discuss possible immunity regarding his involvement with the Bentleyville robbery in exchange for his help in the investigation. Stankovich testified that Buhovecky then related in detail the events surrounding the robbery and admitted that he was the driver of the first getaway car.

Stankovich testified that he met with Buhovecky several more times to discuss the robbery and Buhovecky's possible immunity from prosecution and that during the course of these discussions, Buhovecky implicated appellants Sebetich and Dean in the Bentleyville robbery. Buhovecky also met with an FBI agent, Stankovich, and a representative of the state police to discuss the case, but no agreement concerning immunity was ever reached. Additionally David Daniels testified that Buhovecky had told him that the Bentleyville robbery was a "clean job" and that the "feds would never catch him."

Several persons also testified that Dean spoke of the robbery both before and after it occurred. David Daniels testified that on one occasion in April or May of 1979, while at his sister Cindy Williams' home, he overheard Dean admit to Williams' husband that he had a master plan to rob Bentleyville. Daniels testified that he then told Cindy Williams what he had overheard, and that she listened to the rest of the conversation from the utility room of the house. Williams testified that she heard Dean tell her husband that he was going to rob the Bentleyville bank. Daniels further testified that in June or July, 1979, Dean told him that he had robbed the Bentleyville bank. Moreover, Charles Powers testified that Dean admitted that he robbed the Bentleyville bank and two others.

Margaret Wilks, Dean's stepmother-in-law, testified that she was the owner of a yellow Gremlin similar to that used in the Bentleyville escape. She testified that this car was stolen the night before the robbery, and that Dean was aware of the Wilks' family practice of leaving car keys in the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
162 cases
  • People v. May
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (California)
    • 2 Enero 1987
    ...appellate challenge of an in limine ruling holding grand jury testimony admissible for impeachment. (See also United States v. Sebetich (3d Cir.1985) 776 F.2d 412, 428; United States v. McKinney (5th Cir.1985) 758 F.2d 1036, Last year, the Colorado Supreme Court ruled that Luce was "neither......
  • State v. Dickson
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Connecticut
    • 9 Agosto 2016
    ...suggestiveness of in-court identification), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 1038, 107 S. Ct. 893, 93 L. Ed. 2d 845 (1987); United States v. Sebetich, 776 F.2d 412, 420-21 (3d Cir. 1985) (requiring government to conduct nonsuggestive identification procedures in lieu of one-on-one in-court identifica......
  • U.S. v. Gibbs, 86-1370
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (3rd Circuit)
    • 27 Marzo 1987
    ...Adams, 759 F.2d 1099 (3d Cir.1985), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 106 S.Ct. 336, 88 L.Ed.2d 321 (1985). As we noted in United States v. Sebetich, 776 F.2d 412 (3d Cir.1985), an indictment provides satisfactory protection to a defendant if it fairly informs him of the charge and enables him t......
  • U.S. v. Vastola
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (3rd Circuit)
    • 20 Marzo 1990
    ...on count 1 and shall be resentenced on all the other counts on which he was convicted except for Count 2. See United States v. Sebetich, 776 F.2d 412, 415 & n. 2 (3d Cir.1985), cert. denied, 484 U.S. 1017, 108 S.Ct. 725, 98 L.Ed.2d 673 1 On July 3, 1985, Saka, in a conversation with an indi......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
2 books & journal articles
  • Identification procedures
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books Criminal Defense Tools and Techniques
    • 30 Marzo 2017
    ...table during the eyewitness’s testimony. [ See Moore , 434 U.S. at 231 n.5 (approving of this procedure); United States v. Sebetich , 776 F.2d 412, 420-21 (3d Cir.1985); State v. Tatum , 219 Conn. 721, 729, n.15; 595, A.2d 322, 328 & n.15 (Conn. 1991) (among allowable procedures for lesseni......
  • Chief Judge Edward R. Becker: a truly remarkable judge.
    • United States
    • University of Pennsylvania Law Review Vol. 149 No. 5, May 2001
    • 1 Mayo 2001
    ...States v. Kikumura, 918 F.2d 1084 (3d Cir. 1990) In re Search Warrant (Sealed), 810 F.2d 67 (3d Cir. 1987) [United States v. Sebetich, 776 F.2d 412 (3d Cir. 1985) (included under Fifth United States v. Kulp, 365 F. Supp. 747 (E.D. Pa. 1973) FIFTH AMENDMENT United States v. One Toshiba Color......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT