United States v. Porter
| Docket Number | 21 CR 87 |
| Decision Date | 21 July 2023 |
| Parties | UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. CHRISTOPHER PORTER, Defendant. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Northern District of Illinois |
On June 1, 2022, a jury convicted defendant Christopher Porter on three counts of bank robbery in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a) and one count of brandishing a firearm during and in relation to a bank robbery in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A)(ii). On September 1, 2022, defense counsel filed a motion for judgment of acquittal under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 29(c), or alternatively for a new trial under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 33 [141]. Acting on his own, Porter also filed multiple motions and letters arguing for judgment of acquittal and/or a new trial [127] [155], [156]. The Court struck the pro se motions, but later reinstated them after allowing trial counsel to withdraw from the case and appointing new counsel. On July 18, 2023, the Court heard brief argument from Porter on his motions. For the following reasons, the Court denies all motions-made either by defendant or through counsel-for judgment of acquittal or a new trial.
Law enforcement arrested Porter on February 4, 2021 following a bank robbery at a Fifth Third Bank in Little Village Chicago. On March 4, 2021, a grand jury returned an indictment charging defendant with three counts of bank robbery for robberies that occurred on November 13 2020 (Count I), December 22, 2020 (Count II), and February 4 2021 (Count IV). Count III charged Porter with brandishing a firearm during and in relation to the bank robbery on December 22, 2020.
At trial, the government submitted evidence and called various witnesses to connect Porter to the robberies. As to the November 13, 2020 robbery, bank teller Patricia Sweeten testified that a man put a gun in her face and told her to put money in a bag that he handed her. The jury viewed video recordings of the incident, which showed the robber wearing a white mask, a black hat, blue jeans, and black-and-white shoes. Additional video showed the robber arrive to and leave from the bank in a silver Ford Explorer with a distinctive, circular rear window decal. The vehicle did not display a license plate at the time of the robbery, but the government introduced National Vehicle Location Service reports showing a silver Ford Explorer two days before and on the date of the robbery with the same window decal bearing an Indiana license plate. Records showed that the vehicle was registered in Porter's name.
Three bank employees testified as to the events during the December 22, 2020 bank robbery. Diana Engstrom testified that she was working as a teller at the bank and described the robber as a Black man who was between six-feet and six-feet-two-inches tall. The second employee, Zainab Shukair, stated that the robber held a gun and gave the Ms. Engstrom a bag to put cash in. Javier Florez, the final bank employee, described the robber as “over six feet tall” and “definitely not thin.” These descriptions were supplemented with video footage of the robber, which showed a man wearing a burgundy jacket, burgundy pants, a red hat, and a face mask. Task Force Officer (“TFO”) Randal Hansen testified to two 911 calls describing the robber as wearing red and driving away in a silver Ford SUV. Surveillance footage captured the SUV, which no longer displayed the distinctive decal but had a light-colored ring around the front passenger-side tire. Police Observation Device (“POD”) cameras also showed the SUV stop and an individual fitting the robber's description exit the vehicle and work on something on the rear hatch. A license plate reader shortly thereafter captured the SUV bearing the license plate registered to defendant in a nearby location.
One bank employee testified regarding the February 4, 2021 robbery. He stated that the robber pointed a gun at the employee and a customer and demanded that the employee put $20,000 into a bag he provided. The employee described the robber as African American, six-feet to six-feet-and-five-inches tall, and in his 40s to 50s-ish. The employee testified that the put a number of coin trays in the robber's bag. Bank video footage also provided the jury with images of the robber wearing a black beanie, jeans, a Chicago Bears face mask, and a black jacket. Chicago POD footage showed a silver SUV in the area of the robbery shortly thereafter. TFO Hansen testified that approximately forty-five minutes after the robbery, the FBI stopped the silver SUV registered to Porter. He also identified Porter as the individual driving the vehicle. In the SUV, the FBI found a Chicago Bears face mask, a black beanie, a green dime tray (which the bank employee testified at trial was consistent with the one of the trays he provided to the robber), a black jacket, and mail addressed to Porter. The front passenger-side tire of the vehicle additionally had a white wear ring. Porter had $4,824 in cash in his pocket, which the government seized.
Finally, TFO Hansen testified to the descriptive information associated with Porter's driver's license. That is, that Porter is a male, six-foot-two-inches tall, and 255 pounds. The government asked TFO Hansen “And how does that square with descriptions of the offender that you received during the course of the investigation.” Hansen responded, “It matches the description of the bank robber.” (Tr.[1], at 302-03.) The government also called Bradley Yamaji, a Chicago Police Department officer who conducted a traffic stop of Porter on February 2, 2021, during which Porter was behind the wheel of the silver Ford Explorer registered in his name. The government introduced the body-worn camera footage of that stop.
Before the close of the government's case, the Court previewed the issue of Porter's right to testify or not to testify. The Court instructed Porter that he must soon decide whether to take the stand and that he should consult with trusted individuals, if he wished, about his decision. (Tr., at 325.) The next day, the government rested, and the defense moved for a judgment of not guilty on Counts I-III on the basis that there had been insufficient evidence identifying Porter as the robber. The Court denied the motion. (Id., at 418.) The Court then reopened the conversation about Porter's right to testify. Ultimately, the Court concluded that Porter knowingly and voluntarily waived his constitutional right to testify. (Id., at 418-22.) After some additional evidence and closing arguments, the jury began deliberations on May 31, 2022. On June 1, 2022, the jury returned with a verdict of guilty on all counts.
Defendants seeking a post-trial judgment of acquittal face an extremely high hurdle. United States v. Vizcarra-Millan, 15 F.4th 473, 506 (7th Cir. 2021). This is because when assessing Rule 29(c) motions, “courts view the evidence in the light most favorable to the government to determine whether any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the charged offense beyond a reasonable doubt.” United States v. Wallace, 991 F.3d 810, 812 (7th Cir. 2021). In doing so, courts do not re-weigh the evidence or second-guess credibility determinations and make all reasonable inferences in the government's favor. United States v. Ginsberg, 971 F.3d 689, 695 (7th Cir. 2020).
Porter moves for judgment of acquittal on the basis that the government failed to sustain its burden beyond a reasonable doubt as to the identification of Porter as the robber. Porter, through counsel, admitted that the government provided circumstantial evidence establishing that his appearance resembled the robber, but stated that there was no direct evidence that could support such a finding beyond a reasonable doubt. Ultimately, Porter argues that the government's identification evidence was speculative. In reply, Porter added the assertion that the government's closing argument intentionally encouraged the jury to speculate about the robber's identity.
Viewing the evidence and making all reasonable inferences in the government's favor, the Court finds that there was sufficient trial evidence from which the jury could reasonably conclude that Porter committed all three robberies. As Porter acknowledged, a direct, in-court identification by an eyewitness to the crime is not required to establish identity so long as the “defendant's identity can be inferred from the circumstances.” United States v. Armenta, 883 F.3d 1005, 1008 (7th Cir. 2018). The government provided sufficient evidence for the jury to make this inference. Specifically, the government showed that a person of the same description committed robberies on three separate dates driving a silver SUV registered to Porter. The eyewitness descriptions of the robber's height, weight, and age matched those listed on Porter's state identification. In addition, the jury had photo and video evidence of the robber that they were able to compare to the defendant during their in-court observations. The jury could also reasonably infer that the Porter drove the SUV during the second robbery because the robber removed the vehicle's license plate to conceal the vehicle owner's-Porter's-identity. After the third robbery FBI agents arrested Porter while driving the silver SUV wearing clothes matching the robber's description, and possessing $4,824 in cash, $107 in rolled coins, and a green dime tray from the bank. Finally, the robber committed all three robberies in a similar fashion-wearing a face mask and hat, demanding cash in a bag, pointing a black handgun at tellers and customers, and fleeing in a silver ...
To continue reading
Request your trial