Legal Opinion

United States v. Melvin Todd Lancaster

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

Decided October 4, 1993No. 93-5263PublishedCited by 24 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

2Per curiam

The government appeals the sentence received by defendant Melvin Lancaster after he pled guilty to bank robbery. We find no error in the sentence and affirm.

I

Defendant Lancaster and three other individuals robbed a Pinkerton truck outside a bank in Statesville, North Carolina. During the robbery, they sprayed mace into the eyes of John Gentle, a security guard who was present with the truck. The mace stunned Gentle and caused severe burning in his eyes and cheeks. Gentle was examined by an optometrist after the incident as a precautionary measure but presented no evidence that the mace…

3Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Stinson v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
  2. Bifulco v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
  3. Conroy v. AniskoffSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
  4. Adamo Wrecking Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
  5. United States v. Abdul-Aziz Rashid MuhammadCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1991

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

4Cited by24 opinions

  1. United States v. Susan P. RobinsonCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1994
  2. United States v. GonzalesCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2006
  3. People v. NorrisMichigan Court of Appeals · 1999
  4. United States v. Alonzo L. Harris A/K/A "Letter" Alonzo L. HarrisCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1995
  5. United States v. Kennth JacksonCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2019

19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API