Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.

This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

D, along with several others, robbed three cellphone stores in northeastern Illinois. D and an unknown accomplice entered a T-Mobile store. They first went to the sales counter and asked about cellphones and service plans. Shortly after, Andrew McHaney, another member of the group, came in and locked the front door. The unknown accomplice pulled a gun out, cocked it, and pointed it at the store clerk, one of two employees at the counter. The crew told the two clerks to go to the back room and open the safe. An employee did so, as McHaney worked to stuff cellphones into a black garbage bag. At the same time, D led a clerk to the front of the store, where he removed the store register with gloved hands. The crew then tore some of the security equipment off the walls and attempted to put the clerks into the closet. While the two clerks tried to squeeze into the closet, the three robbers exited through the back door. D walked into a Verizon store with a hat and a hooded sweatshirt on. He spoke to one of the owners of the store, Jorge Acosta, while browsing around. After the last customer had left, Anthony Johnson and an unknown accomplice entered the store with hoods to cover their heads. D told Johnson to lock the front door. He then pulled out a gun, cocked it, and pointed it at Jorge, who was working that day with two sales associates, Diego Acosta and Kayla McKenzie. D ordered them all to the back of the store. The crew made Jorge open the safe, which he did, before they forced him to his knees with the two employees. The unknown associate, wearing gloves, put all the cellphones into two black garbage bags with Johnson's help. After the crew was done, they demanded the store's security recordings, then fled through the back door into a getaway car. D and McHaney entered an AT&T store, both wearing a hat and a hood. McHaney forced the employee into the store's back room with a gun, as D locked the front door. They demanded the employee's keys to the safe. D grabbed the keys, opened the safe, and loaded the merchandise into two black garbage bags. The two men then took the employee's wallet and cellphone, removed the store's cash register, and fled through the store's back door. The grand jury indicted D on conspiracy to obstruct, delay, or affect commerce by robbery, Hobbs Act robbery, and brandishing a firearm during two of the robberies. D pleaded guilty to conspiracy and two of the Hobbs Act robberies. D maintained his innocence on the three remaining charges-brandishing a firearm, the Hobbs Act robbery for the Verizon store, and brandishing a firearm during that robbery. P filed a motion in limine to introduce evidence of the Chicago and Bradley robberies to establish Edwards's modus operandi and identity as a participant in the Verizon Robbery. The government noted that it further intended to introduce this evidence as direct evidence that Edwards brandished a weapon in connection with the Bradley robbery. D objected under Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b), contending that the government's theory relied on impermissible propensity reasoning. The district court admitted the evidence and gave the jury a limiting instruction regarding it. D was convicted and appealed.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.