Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.

Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw

United States of America v. Vincent Nicholas Petrushkin, aka Vincint Petrushkin, aka Vincent Petrushkin

Date: 07-14-2025

Case Number: 2:21-CR-00164

Judge: Thomas O. Rice

Court: United States District Court for the Eastern District of Washington (Spokane County)

Plaintiff's Attorney: United States District Attorney's Office in Spokane

Defendant's Attorney: Zach Aayers

Description:
Spokane, Washington criminal defense lawyer represented the Defendant charged with felony possession of a firearm.



Randy Holmes told a confidential informant for the

Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives

("ATF”) that he needed a gun to conduct a robbery, and ATF

set up a sting firearm transaction at a Motel 6 in Spokane on

November 5, 2021. Holmes drove to the Motel 6 with

William Burns and Vincent Petrushkin (the defendant here).

Petrushkin believed that they would rob someone at the

Motel 6 but did not know about Holmes's plan to obtain a

gun to conduct future robberies. At the Motel 6, Holmes told

Burns and Petrushkin that he was "gonna do this by myself

homie” and rejected their offers of help. Burns then gave

Holmes a Glock Model 17 9mm semi-automatic handgun.

After Burns transferred the gun to Holmes, Petrushkin asked

if he could see the gun. Petrushkin "held the gun, looked at

it and said hell yeah,” handed the gun back to Holmes, and

got into the backseat of the car. Petrushkin possessed the gun

for approximately five seconds.

Outcome:
The Defendant elected to plead guilty.



The § 2K2.1(c)(1) enhancement applies when a defendant possesses a firearm “in a manner that permits an inference that it facilitated or potentially facilitated . . . felonious conduct.” Routon, 25 F.3d at 819. The district court did not make a finding that Petrushkin possessed a firearm in a manner that potentially emboldened or facilitated his codefendant’s robbery, and the facts in the

record do nt permit the necessary inference. We therefore vacate the 48-month sentence and remand for resentencing consistent with this opinion.6
Plaintiff's Experts:
Defendant's Experts:
Comments:

About This Case

What was the outcome of United States of America v. Vincent Nicholas Petrushkin, ...?

The outcome was: The Defendant elected to plead guilty. The § 2K2.1(c)(1) enhancement applies when a defendant possesses a firearm “in a manner that permits an inference that it facilitated or potentially facilitated . . . felonious conduct.” Routon, 25 F.3d at 819. The district court did not make a finding that Petrushkin possessed a firearm in a manner that potentially emboldened or facilitated his codefendant’s robbery, and the facts in the record do nt permit the necessary inference. We therefore vacate the 48-month sentence and remand for resentencing consistent with this opinion.6

Which court heard United States of America v. Vincent Nicholas Petrushkin, ...?

This case was heard in United States District Court for the Eastern District of Washington (Spokane County), wa. The presiding judge was Thomas O. Rice.

Who were the attorneys in United States of America v. Vincent Nicholas Petrushkin, ...?

Plaintiff's attorney: United States District Attorney's Office in Spokane. Defendant's attorney: Zach Aayers.

When was United States of America v. Vincent Nicholas Petrushkin, ... decided?

This case was decided on July 14, 2025.