United States of America v. Skyler F. Sanders

United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 22-1552
___________________________
United States of America
Plaintiff - Appellee
v.
Skyler F. Sanders
Defendant - Appellant
____________
Appeal from United States District Court
for the District of Nebraska - Omaha
____________
Submitted: November 18, 2022
Filed: March 29, 2023
[Unpublished]
____________
Before BENTON, KELLY, and ERICKSON, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.
After a two-day bench trial, the district court1 found Skyler Sanders guilty of
two offenses: bank robbery, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2113(a) and 2; and
brandishing a firearm in furtherance of a crime of violence, in violation of 18 U.S.C.
1 The Honorable Joseph F. Batallion, United States District Judge for the
District of Nebraska.

-- 1 of 5 --

-2-
§§ 924(c)(1)(A) and 2. The district court sentenced Sanders to consecutive terms of
96 months’ and 84 months’ imprisonment. On appeal, Sanders contends the
evidence was insufficient on each count. We affirm.
The charges arise out of a robbery of a Bank of the West branch in Omaha,
Nebraska. We review challenges to the sufficiency of the evidence de novo, viewing
the evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict. United States v. Gross, 23
F.4th 1048, 1052 (8th Cir. 2022) (citation omitted). Co-defendant, Melvin Wilson,
pled guilty and agreed to cooperate. Two days before the robbery, Teddi Tyree, who
resided in Georgia, traveled to Omaha to visit Sanders. When she arrived at the
airport, Tyree rented a white Infiniti Q50 (the “Infiniti”). The car was operated with
a key fob, only one of which Tyree received. The day after her arrival, Tyree and
Sanders parked the Infiniti at the Pine Tree Apartments where Tyree’s father resided.
They then returned to Sanders’ house in his Hummer. Only Tyree and Sanders knew
where the Infiniti was parked. Tyree took the Infiniti key fob with her to Sanders’
residence. The next afternoon, Tyree discovered the Infiniti was missing.
A resident of an apartment complex testified that on the morning of the bank
robbery (August 16, 2019), he observed a white Infiniti and a Chevy Equinox that
did not belong to any of the residents. He saw two black males, one with dreadlocks,
who appeared to be exchanging something between the trunks of the vehicles.
Wilson had dreadlocks at the time.
At trial, Wilson recounted the details leading up to the robbery, including his
purchase of a black cloth and a sewing kit from Walgreens, his observation of
Sanders with a green beanie cap with eye holes cut out of it, Sanders’ possession of
a metallic gray firearm, and the dealer plates and tape used to cover the Infiniti’s
license plates. Once the Infiniti’s plates were covered, Wilson testified that he drove
Sanders to the Bank of the West. Sanders directed Wilson to let him out, but before
Sanders got out of the car, Sanders pulled his gun and said, “Don’t leave me.”
Sanders was in the bank for about a minute and a half and returned with a black bag
containing money. He ordered Wilson to “Go.” Wilson then drove the Infiniti back

-- 2 of 5 --

-3-
to the Equinox. Wilson then removed the dealer tags and they drove away in the
Equinox. Sanders got out of the car with the bag of money at a community center
located near 24th Street and Woolworth. Despite several text messages from Wilson
asking for his share of the money, Sanders kept all the money taken during the
robbery.
The government also presented testimony from several bank employees who
were present during the robbery: T.J. Andreasen, a part-time teller; Rickey Loftin,
the branch manager; and Shnobia Curry, a teller and sometimes romantic partner of
Sanders. Andreasen testified that at approximately 10:34 A.M. on August 16, 2019,
a person “rushed” into the bank through the front doors, went to Andreasen’s teller
station, and demanded money. Loftin’s recounting of the events was similar and
described the robber as a male who was a little taller than him (Loftin testified that
he is six foot three inches tall). The tellers recounted how the robber displayed a
gun and repeatedly hit it on the counter. Andreasen, Loftin, and Curry collectively
testified that the gun appeared to be real and made of metal.
Curry had met Sanders about ten or eleven years prior to the robbery. She
positively identified Sanders in the courtroom. She testified that the robber and
Sanders were of the same height and build and that it was possible the robber was
Sanders. Curry stated that she and Sanders were intermittently romantically
involved and she frequently communicated with Sanders through text messages,
iPhone messages, or Snapchat. On the morning of August 16, 2019, Curry received
Snapchat messages from Sanders asking if the bank was busy and, using a pig emoji,
if police were present. Curry responded, “Yes” in an effort to deter Sanders from
coming to the bank. Curry recalled the robber brandishing a gun and demanding
that she bring him money.
Officer Brad Bornhoft of the Omaha Police Department (“OPD”) was the first
officer on scene. Loftin reported to him that an armed male wearing a mask, who
was approximately six feet four inches tall with a large build, had robbed the bank.

-- 3 of 5 --

-4-
Loftin noted that the suspect got into a newer model white Infiniti and headed
eastbound on West Center Road.
Meanwhile, Officer John Vailliant responded to a report of suspicious
activity, which appeared to be possibly related to the robbery. Upon arriving, Officer
Vailliant observed a white Infiniti parked on the west side of 82nd Avenue. There
was no indication that the vehicle had been broken into. Officer Vailliant observed
black tape on the back license plate as well as a black cloth mask on the driver’s side
seat. DNA found on the cloth matched Wilson’s DNA.
Federal Bureau of Investigation Special Agent John Hallock testified that he
also responded to the Bank of the West robbery and was involved in the subsequent
investigation. On October 3, 2019, when Special Agent Hallock attempted to
execute search warrants for Sanders’ DNA and phone, Sanders fled.
Kyle Drews, a forensic technician with OPD, testified that after the robbery,
the white Infiniti was towed to impound where it was photographed and processed
for prints and DNA. A black cloth found on the driver’s seat tested positive for
Wilson’s DNA. Testing of a swab taken from the Infiniti’s steering wheel found a
high likelihood that Sanders was a contributor to the mixture of DNA.
In considering a sufficiency of the evidence challenge, we apply the “no
reasonable jury could have found the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt”
standard. Gross, 23 F.4th at 1052 (citation omitted); see also United States v. Morris,
791 F.3d 910, 913 (8th Cir. 2015) (citation omitted) (noting the same standard for a
jury verdict is applied to convictions following a bench trial). With regard to the
first count, 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a) defines bank robbery as taking “by force and
violence, or by intimidation[] . . . from the person or presence of another[] . . . any
property or money or any other thing of value belonging to, or in the care, custody,
control, management, or possession of, any bank.” The evidence overwhelmingly
supports the district court’s conclusion that Sanders committed each of these
essential elements, and that the Bank of the West is an FDIC insured bank. Wilson’s

-- 4 of 5 --

-5-
testimony alone, which the district court credited, is sufficient to sustain the
conviction for bank robbery. Curry’s and Andreasen’s testimony further
corroborated Sanders’ involvement.
With respect to the second count, “brandish” is statutorily defined as
“display[ing] all or part of the firearm, or otherwise mak[ing] the presence of the
firearm known to another person, in order to intimidate that person, regardless of
whether the firearm is directly visible to that person.” 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(4).
Testimony from the bank’s employees is more than adequate to establish that: (1)
Sanders displayed a firearm in furtherance of the robbery; (2) they believed the
firearm was real; and (3) Sanders used it in a manner to intimidate them.
For the foregoing reasons, we affirm the judgment of the district court.
Defense counsel’s motion to withdraw as appointed counsel is denied.
______________________________

-- 5 of 5 --