United States of America v. Carlos Dominick Balams

Mobile, Alabama criminal defense lawyer represented Defendant charged with armed robbery and brandishing a firearm during the commission of a crime of violence.



On August 2, 2022, members of the Mobile Police Department responded to the Dollar Tree Store located at 5201 Cottage Hill Road, Mobile, Alabama, due to a report of an armed robbery. While officers were enroute to the location, they were informed the suspect, later identified as Carlos Dominick Balams, was last seen on Cottage Hill Road wearing a reflective vest as well as other identifiable clothing. The officers were also advised Balams had a firearm.



Officers found Balams not far from the store near Cottage Hill Road and Knollwood Drive and he was taken into custody. Officers searched nearby and found a firearm, a cellular telephone, and cash that was stolen from the Dollar Tree. Other items were located by officers in the area between the Dollar Tree and where officers initially located Balams. Among these items was a second cellular telephone, which Balams had taken from one of the victims inside the store during the robbery.



Balams was taken back to the Dollar Tree and the victims of the armed robbery, and two store employees identified him as the armed robber. All the clothing the defendant wore and items he carried during the robbery, seen on the store security tape, were recovered on the defendant or on the path he took fleeing from the store. This included the firearm, the mask, the reflective vest and a backpack. While fleeing after the robbery, Balams lost one of his sneakers, which was found by police. The sneaker had a distinctive type U shaped trim which could be clearly seen in the store video.



The case was investigated by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives and the Mobile Police Department. The case was prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorney George F. May.



HOBBS ACT ROBBERY OF A BUSINESS



The Hobbs Act prohibits actual or attempted robbery or extortion affecting interstate or foreign commerce "in any way or degree." Section 1951 also proscribes conspiracy to commit robbery or extortion without reference to the conspiracy statute at 18 U.S.C. § 371. The statutory prohibition of "physical violence to any person or property in furtherance of a plan or purpose to do anything in violation of this section" is confined to violence for the purpose of committing robbery or extortion. United States v. Franks, 511 F.2d 25, 31 (6th Cir. 1975) (rejecting the view that the statute proscribes all physical violence obstructing, delaying, or affecting commerce as contrasted with violence designed to culminate in robbery or extortion).



The extortion offense reaches both the obtaining of property "under color of official right" by public officials and the obtaining of property by private actors with the victim's "consent, induced by wrongful use of actual or threatened force, violence, or fear," including fear of economic harm. See this Manual at 2405 and Evans v. United States, 504 U.S. 255, 265, 112 S.Ct. 1181, 1188 (1992) (only a private individual's extortion of property by the wrongful use of force, violence, or fear requires that the victim's consent be induced by these means; extortion of property under color of official right does not require that a public official take steps to induce the extortionate payment).



Although the Hobbs Act was enacted in 1946 to combat racketeering in labor-management disputes, the extortion statute is frequently used in connection with cases involving public corruption, commercial disputes, and corruption directed at members of labor unions. Proof of "racketeering" as an element of Hobbs Act offenses is not required. United States v. Culbert, 435 U.S. 371, 98 S.Ct. 1112 (1978). However, a violation of the Hobbs Act may be part of a "pattern of racketeering activity" for purposes of prosecution under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) statute (18 U.S.C. § 1961, et seq.).



BRANDISHING OF A FIREARM DURING CRIME OF VIOLENCE

Imprisonment: 36 months, to run consecutively with the term imposed as to Count 2, w/recommendation to BOP that dft be imprisoned at an institution where residential, comprehensive, substance abuse treatment programs are available; SRT: 3 years, to run concurrently with the term imposed on Count 2, w/the following special conditions: (1) substance abuse testing, (2) substance abuse treatment, (3) searches by Probation, (4) financial restrictions, (5) financial information to Probation, & (6) make restitution; Restitution: $300.00; SA: $100.00.