United States v. Franco-Santiago
United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit
681 F.3d 1 (2012)

- Written by Carolyn Strutton, JD
Facts
José Franco-Santiago (defendant) was a police officer in Puerto Rico who participated in a robbery with a number of coconspirators on August 7, 2002. Franco-Santiago lent his gun to be used by one of the robbers, drove the getaway car, and received $7,500 as his cut of the stolen money. Some of his coconspirators participated in four other robberies between July 2002 and September 2002. One coconspirator, Rubén Hernández, was involved in all five of the robberies and was a common link between the other coconspirators, who were variously involved in some or all of the other robberies. Franco-Santiago, however, only participated in the August 7 robbery and had no knowledge of or involvement with any of the other four robberies. Hernández was eventually arrested and began cooperating with federal law-enforcement agents. On August 22, 2007, Franco-Santiago and seven codefendants were charged with conspiracy to rob businesses engaged in interstate commerce under the Hobbs Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1951(a), for the five robberies between July and September of 2002. Franco-Santiago was the only defendant to go to trial, and he was convicted and appealed. Franco-Santiago alleged that, even if he had participated in a conspiracy for the August 7 robbery, there was no evidence to show he had conspired in the other four robberies, and that if he was only guilty in regard to the August 7 robbery, then the five-year statute of limitations for noncapital federal crimes had run before the August 22, 2007 indictment.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Lynch, C.J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,400 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.