What If You Were Charged With Armed Robbery Because You Gave

What If You Were Charged With Armed Robbery Because You Gave Three Of

What if you were charged with armed robbery because you gave three of your friends a ride to a local bank, not knowing that they were going to rob it? On arrival, your friends told you they just needed to go in to withdraw some money and told you to wait in your car with the engine on. A couple of minutes later, your friends ran out of the bank with cash in their hands. They told you to quickly drive away but police had already arrived and all of you were placed under arrest. Your public defender told you to plead guilty to second degree robbery with a prison term of 3 years, and said that if you insisted on going to trial; you could face up to 25 years in prison. You had one prior felony conviction. What would your decision be and why?

Paper For Above instruction

The scenario presented raises significant legal and ethical questions about criminal liability, intent, and criminal justice procedures. The decision to accept a plea bargain or to proceed to trial is complex, especially considering personal history, the specifics of the case, and the potential consequences.

In this scenario, the individual was an unwitting participant in a bank robbery committed by friends. Legally, the question centers on whether mere transportation without knowledge of the crime constitutes criminal liability. Under the principle of mens rea, or guilty mind, criminal guilt generally requires that the defendant knowingly committed or intended to commit a crime. Here, the individual claims to have been unaware of the bank robbery, which if true, reduces the likelihood of guilt for armed robbery or accessory liability.

However, complicating factors include the individual's prior felony conviction. Prior convictions can enhance sentencing severity because they are considered aggravating factors. The sentencing guidelines for second-degree robbery typically depend on state laws but often include significant prison terms, especially for individuals with criminal histories. The plea bargain suggested by the public defender involves a 3-year prison sentence, which may be considered lenient given the circumstances, but accepting it would result in incarceration and the loss of trial rights.

Deciding whether to accept the plea bargain or go to trial involves weighing the risks and benefits. Pleading guilty would likely result in a shorter, certain sentence, avoiding the risk of a much harsher punishment if found guilty at trial. Conversely, going to trial retains the right to contest the charges and potentially prove lack of intent or innocence, but it also exposes the individual to the maximum sentence of up to 25 years, a significant risk given the prior felony conviction.

From an ethical standpoint, the decision should consider the person's belief in their innocence, the strength of the evidence against them, and their willingness to accept responsibility. If the individual genuinely did not know their friends intended to rob the bank, they might argue that they lack the requisite intent for armed robbery and should contest the charges. Alternatively, if they feel they bear some responsibility for their role, accepting the plea might be the most pragmatic choice to minimize incarceration time and potential collateral consequences, such as the impact of a felony conviction on future employment and social standing.

Legal counsel would typically advise clients to consider the probability of conviction, the strength of the prosecutors' case, the potential penalties, and the personal and legal ramifications of each option. Given the complexity, a nuanced decision balances the facts, legal advice, personal circumstances, and future implications.

Overall, the decision hinges on whether the individual believes they can successfully defend themselves at trial, the strength of evidence, their understanding of their own involvement, and their personal circumstances, including the prior felony. A strategic decision-making process, often with the guidance of competent legal counsel, is vital in addressing such criminal cases effectively.

References

• Bohm, R. M., & Haley, K. N. (2015). Convicted: Law, Crime, and Justice in Modern America. Cengage Learning.
• Dressler, J. (2012). Understanding Criminal Procedure. LexisNexis.
• FindLaw. (2023). Common Defenses to Criminal Charges. Retrieved from https://criminal.findlaw.com/criminal-law/defenses-to-crime.html
• Legal Information Institute. (2023). Mens Rea. Cornell Law School.
• Morgan, R. (2020). Criminal Law and Procedure. Cengage Learning.
• Shuman, D. (2014). Understanding Criminal Law. Rowman & Littlefield.
• Shoemaker, B. B. (2010). Criminal Justice: An Introduction to Law Enforcement, Law, Courts, and Corrections. Sage Publications.
• Simons, D. D. (2019). Principles of Criminal Law. Routledge.
• Williams, P. (2018). Criminal Justice: An Introduction to Practice and Theory. Routledge.
• FindLaw. (2023). Procedures After Crime. Retrieved from https://criminal.findlaw.com/criminal-procedure/procedures-after-crime.html