Two men who robbed and stole hundreds of thousands of dollars from Indiana Walmart stores could not convince the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals on Friday that there was insufficient evidence to support their convictions.
Cousins Christopher Davis and Maurice Greer in 2015 twice robbed an Indianapolis Walmart store and a Kokomo Walmart store during a four-month period where they, with accomplices, stole roughly $225,000. The men had an in to commit the crimes after Davis’ girlfriend, who worked at the Indianapolis Walmart, informed him of the policies and procedures for handling cash at the store.
Davis was ultimately charged with violating Statute 18 U.S.C. § 1951, § 924(c), § 1951, § 924(c) for the Indianapolis robberies, § 1951 and § 924(c) for the Kokomo robbery and § 1951(a). Similarly, Greer was charged with violating Statute 18 U.S.C. § 1951 and § 924(c) for the Indianapolis robberies, § 1951, § 924(c) and § 922(g) for the Kokomo robbery.
A jury trial found both men guilty on all charges and the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana denied Davis and Greer’s motions for acquittal, finding sufficient evidence to sustain each of the charged offenses.
The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed that decision in USA v. Christopher Davis and Maurice Greer, 18-3129, 18-2634, first rejecting Davis’ assertions that there was insufficient evidence to support his convictions of counts 1, 3 and 4.
“Although Davis might not have physically entered the Walmart during the (June 8) robbery, the government provided ample evidence that he affirmatively assisted in at least one way,” Chief Judge Diane Wood wrote for the 7th Circuit, noting that Davis drove the getaway car.
Additionally, it found ample testimony supporting a finding that Davis’ girlfriend feared injury during the August 28 robbery and that her fear of being killed was reasonable. The 7th Circuit also noted that Count 3 was a predicate offense to convict Davis on Count 4, and therefore affirmed jury’s verdict on Count 4.
As for Greer, the 7th Circuit came to similar conclusions regarding his argument that insufficient evidence supported his convictions on counts 1 and 5. It rejected Greer’s assertion that his brother was responsible for the robberies and noted the corroborating evidence supporting Greer’s conviction based on the photographs of the stolen money on his phone as well as thousands in cash in his pocket and in the getaway vehicle.