United States of America v. Willie David Applewhite

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent*
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision**
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
AK/Research
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
WILLIE DAVID APPLEWHITE,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 09-30221
D.C. No. 6:08-CR-60037-MRH
MEMORANDUM *
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Oregon
Michael R. Hogan, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted February 16, 2010**
Before: FERNANDEZ, GOULD, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Willie David Applewhite appeals from the district court’s denial of his
motion to dismiss the indictment for lack of jurisdiction. We have jurisdiction
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
FILED
MAR 02 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

AK/Research 09-30221 2
Applewhite contends that the federal bank robbery statute, 18 U.S.C.
§ 2113(a), lacks a sufficient nexus to interstate commerce because the Federal
Deposit Insurance Corporation does not insure banks against theft or robbery, and
therefore bank robberies do not cause any loss to the federal government. This
contention lacks merit. See United States v. Blajos, 292 F.3d 1068, 1071-72 (9th
Cir. 2002); United States v. Harris, 108 F.3d 1107, 1109 (9th Cir. 1997).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --