Man faces felony charges for Roseville theft, pleads guilty

On New Year’s Eve, a 25-year-old man apparently walked into a Quiznos sandwich shop and robbed the store of $310 dollars. For that, he was charged with federal crimes, including possession of a firearm during and in relation to a crime of violence and interference with commerce by robbery. For the firearm charge alone he could be sentenced to life in prison; for the robbery charge he will face a minimum of ten years and a maximum of 20 years. What really is at question, however, is why the man was charged under federal law.

Federal prosecutors used a law from 1946 to charge the 25-year-old. The Hobbs Act allowed for federal criminal charges for individuals suspected of armed robbery in businesses with a connection to interstate commerce. Though this answers how federal prosecutors were able to charge him under federal law, but it doesn’t explain why a federal prosecution was chosen over state criminal charges.

It seems that federal convictions do not include parole, meaning that anyone who is convicted of a federal crime will have to spend nearly his or her entire sentence in prison, even if it is clear that he or she will be of no threat to society. Federal criminal charges also come with stricter penalties that leave people locked up longer.

It may make sense to select criminal charges that will leave a violent or extremely dangerous suspect in prison for the rest of his life, but this 25-year-old doesn’t quite fit the profile. Yes, he had a sawed-off shotgun when he entered the store, but he never injured anyone. At most, he stole $464, hardly a substantial sum of money. Finally, there wasn’t even a long manhunt that exhausted considerable resources to find the man. He was arrested later that evening.

Unfortunately, this man will be spending a disproportionate amount of time behind bars what actually happened.

Source: Roseville Patch, “Man Pleads Guilty to Roseville Quiznos Robbery,” Scott Carlson, July 26, 2012

Max Keller has won countless jury trial cases involving misdemeanors and felonies, sex crimes, and DWI’s. He is a member of the Minnesota Society for Criminal Justice, which only allows the top 50 criminal defense attorneys in the state as members. Max is a frequent speaker at CLE’s and is often asked for advice by other defense attorneys across Minnesota.

Years of Experience: Approx. 20 years
Minnesota Registration Status: Active
Bar & Court Admissions: State of Minnesota Minnesota State Court Minnesota Federal Court 8th Circuit Federal Court of Appeals State of Maryland

What to Do If You Have Been Charged with a Criminal Offense

The Surprising Cost of a Guilty Criminal Plea in Minnesota

Defendants in Minnesota may plead guilty or accept deals without understanding the hidden cost of a guilty criminal plea. A guilty criminal plea, regardless of how appealing it appears, can leave you dealing with substantial lifelong consequences. You may skip lengthy trial proceedings and likely get a lenient sentence, but end up with a criminal record. The record can lead to various financial and collateral consequences, including difficulty in securing employment, loss of housing rights, license revocation, and immigration issues.

What You Can Expect at a Pre-Trial Motions Hearing in Minnesota

The pre-trial motions hearing is a court session you attend after your first arraignment. At the hearing, the prosecution and defense appear before a judge to clear several details about the case before trial. These details include pre-trial motions, evidentiary queries, and constitutional matters.

Refusing Arrest vs. Resisting Arrest in Minnesota: What’s the Difference?

Highly publicized incidents of police using excessive force over the past few years have led to people wondering, “What’s the difference between refusing arrest vs. resisting arrest?” Resisting arrest in Minnesota occurs when you use force to prevent a police officer from making a lawful arrest. Refusing an arrest, on the other hand, involves statements or actions that show reluctance to cooperate with an officer’s instructions without using force.