A federal jury in Raleigh today found Dannie Simon Parker Jr. guilty of robbing PNC Bank off Julian R. Allsbrook Highway in December of 2017.
According to the verdict form contained in the court record the jury found Parker guilty on count one of the indictment, which charged that he by force and violence, or by intimidation, took, from the person and presence of another, money belonging to and in the care, custody, control, management, and possession of PNC Bank.
Court records did not immediately indicate when sentencing would be scheduled.
Court records indicated a relatively quick proceeding in which jurors were seated Monday and opening statements were given by counsel for the government and defense.
The government presented its evidence and rested while the defense for Parker presented no evidence.
District Judge James C. Dever III excused jurors shortly after 4:15 p.m. Monday and called for the court to reconvene for a charge conference shortly before 9 a.m today.
In a notice to introduce evidence filed in April, United States Attorney Robert J. Higdon Jr. laid out the case the government planned to present should Parker have testified.
On December 28, 2017, Parker, entered PNC at 1180 Julian R. Allsbrook Highway wearing a brown hooded sweatshirt, dark pants, brown boots, and sunglasses.
He approached the bank teller supervisor and presented a note demanding money in certain denominations and instructing, “no funny business.”
The supervisor walked with the defendant to the teller window and provided him with the money as instructed. The defendant told the supervisor repeatedly to “stay calm.” The defendant could be seen clearly on bank surveillance footage.
While handing cash over to the defendant, the supervisor triggered a silent bank alarm. She also gave the defendant a set of bait bills, a stack of cash that included a GPS tracker hidden inside. The defendant then fled the bank.
Using the GPS tracking data, the Roanoke Rapids Police Department encountered the defendant on Interstate 95. In his possession was the cash from the robbery, along with the clothes worn during the robbery, and the demand note presented. The defendant was arrested on scene.
Higdon wrote at the time, “Should the defendant take the stand, the United States may seek to present evidence concerning the defendant’s two previous federal criminal convictions for bank robbery … These convictions were punishable by terms of imprisonment up to 20 years. In addition, these convictions are less than ten years old for the purposes of (prosecution).”
Wrote Higdon: “If the defendant testifies, then the United States intends to offer the convictions for admission as the probative value of the evidence outweighs the prejudicial effect to the defendant.”
Higdon concluded the document saying, “Should the defendant take the stand at trial in this case, he may testify that, although he was present at the bank, he did not intend to commit robbery. Such testimony may be impeached by reference to the defendant’s previous convictions, which show an absence of mistake. This example is one of many ways in which the defendant’s testimony may be impeached by his history of convictions. Therefore, in an abundance of caution, the United States submits the instant notice.”