Armed Robbery and Unarmed Robbery

A conviction for armed robbery has serious consequences, including the possibility of a life prison sentence.

Elements of Armed Robbery

In order to convict a defendant of armed robbery, the Commonwealth must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that:

  1. The defendant had armed himself with a dangerous weapon;
  2. The defendant either threatened the victim (thereby placing the victim in fear) or used force and violence against the victim’s body;
  3. The defendant took the victim’s property and intended to steal it; and
  4. The defendant stole the property from the victim’s body or immediate control of the victim.

A dangerous weapon is defined as an item that is capable of causing serious injury or death. An item that is normally used for innocent purposes can become a dangerous weapon if it is intentionally used as a weapon in a dangerous or potentially dangerous fashion. For example, a lit cigarette can be a dangerous weapon if used to burn someone and a sharpened pencil can be a dangerous weapon if thrown at someone’s eyes.

There are enhanced penalties if the defendant was masked or if the defendant was armed with a gun. Unarmed robbery is a lesser included offense of armed robbery and does not require the Commonwealth to prove the defendant was armed with a dangerous weapon.

Common Defense Strategies

Armed robbery cases can be defended in a variety of ways.

  • Identification - Particularly when the defendant is masked, there will likely be an issue of identity. An armed robbery is obviously a stressful and hectic incident. It makes sense that an alleged victim might misidentify the defendant. Spring & Spring aggressively cross-examines all eyewitnesses in these types of cases.
  • Alleged Victim’s Criminal Record - If the alleged victim has a criminal record or a history of violence, Spring & Spring will attempt to present this information to the jury. Criminal convictions are generally admissible within a certain time frame (convictions for misdemeanors within the last five years are admissible; convictions for felonies within the last 10 years are admissible). History of violence evidence (also called “prior bad act” evidence) is generally admissible if the defendant is asserting self-defense. Spring & Spring attorneys have extensive experience litigating these types of issues.
  • Bias - In most armed robbery cases that go to trial, there is bad blood between the defendant and the alleged victim. The alleged victim ordinarily wants to see the defendant convicted and punished. The alleged victim’s desire for revenge will be fully exposed on cross-examination.

Some alleged victims can refuse to testify because they have a Fifth Amendment Privilege. The Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution states that no person can be forced to offer testimony that might incriminate himself or herself in a crime. Therefore, if an alleged victim struck the defendant during the incident or if the alleged victim lied to the police about the facts of the case, that witness can assert his or her Fifth Amendment privilege and refuse to testify against the defendant.

Given the serious consequences that result from an armed robbery conviction, it is essential that you have an attorney who is experienced in trying these types of cases. Attorney Chris Spring has the necessary experience to aggressively defend your case.

Client Reviews
I hit a guy on a bike after I took Oxycontin that was prescribed by a doctor. We went to trial and I was found not guilty of operating under the influence of drugs. Because of Chris I was able to get my license back right away.
★★★★★
The police beat me up and charged me with resisting arrest. I have a long criminal record. Mr. Spring took me to trial and the jury found me not guilty. Mr. Spring showed the cops were lying.
★★★★★
I had a fender bender with a cop car during bad weather and the police charged me with negligent driving. Chris was my lawyer and I was found not guilty by the jury.
★★★★★
The cops said I tried to hit them with my car. Chris got a surveillance video that showed they were lying. The jury said I was not guilty.
★★★★★
I was stopped for a DWI and I failed all the field tests. Chris explained to the jury why I failed to field tests and I was found not guilty.
★★★★★