I chose the case Carter v. United States – Carter v. United States, 530 U.S. 255 (2000). The parties involved in this case were Floyd J. Carter, the petitioner and the United States of America, the defendant. In 1997, Mr. Carter entered the Collective Federal Savings bank with a ski mask and no weapon. Carter robbed the bank for roughly $16,000. When Carter was arrested he was charged with federal bank robbery – 18 USC Section 2113(a). This statute states "[w]hoever, by force and violence, or by intimidation, takes... any... thing of value [from a] bank." (Carter). Mr. Carter entered a not guilty plea saying that he had not taken the bank’s money by force. Violence, or intimidation, so he did not meet the requirements of the statute that he was charged under. Mr. Carter then put in a motion that the court give instructions to the jury that they should consider federal bank larceny (USC Section 2113(b). This would make Mr. Carter guilty of larceny instead of robbery. The larceny law states, “[w]hoever takes and carries away, with intent to steal or purloin, any... thing of value exceeding $1,000 [from a]... bank," (Carter). The difference between bank robbery and the larceny offense is a ten-year maximum difference – larceny carrying a 10-year maximum sentence and robbery carrying a 20-year maximum sentence. The court denied the motion and the jury found Mr. Carter guilty on robbery. This sentence was affirmed by the Court of Appeals. The question of this case is “whether defendants charged with federal bank robbery have the jury consider whether they committed the lesser crime of federal bank robbery?” (Carter). Donald J. McCauley argued the case on behalf of the petitioner and David C. Fredrick on behalf of the respondent.
The ruling by the Supreme Court was a 5-4 opinion and was delivered by Justice Clarence Thomas. The court stated federal bank