Harrisburg man charged with three armed robberies
HARRISBURG, Pa.– The United States Attorney’s Office for the Middle District of Pennsylvania announced today that Maurice L. Ross, age 34, of Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, was indicted on March 29, 2017, by a federal grand jury with unlawful possession of a firearm and three armed robberies.
According to United States Attorney Bruce D. Brandler, the indictment alleges that Ross robbed the Brookwood Mart, located in Harrisburg, by gunpoint on three separate occasions in December 2016. The indictment also alleges Ross was a convicted felon, making it illegal for him to possess a firearm. Ross was also charged with brandishing a firearm during a crime of violence.
The case was investigated by the Harrisburg Police Department. Assistant United States Attorney James T. Clancy is prosecuting the case.
This case was brought as part of the Violent Crime Reduction Partnership (“VCRP”), a district wide initiative to combat the spread of violent crime in the Middle District of Pennsylvania. Led by the United States Attorney’s Office, the VCRP consists of federal, state and local law enforcement agencies whose mission is to locate, apprehend, and prosecute individuals who commit violent crimes with firearms.
Indictments and Criminal Informations are only allegations. All persons charged are presumed to be innocent unless and until found guilty in court.
A sentence following a finding of guilt is imposed by the Judge after consideration of the applicable federal sentencing statutes and the Federal Sentencing Guidelines.
The maximum penalty under federal law for each of the unlawful possession of firearm charges is 10 years in prison, a term of supervised release following imprisonment, and a fine. The maximum penalty for each of the armed robbery charges is 20 years in prison, a term of supervised release following imprisonment, and a fine. The maximum penalty for each charge of brandishing a firearm during a crime of violence is life in prison. Under the Federal Sentencing Guidelines, the Judge is also required to consider and weigh a number of factors, including the nature, circumstances and seriousness of the offense; the history and characteristics of the defendant; and the need to punish the defendant, protect the public and provide for the defendant’s educational, vocational and medical needs. For these reasons, the statutory maximum penalty for the offense is not an accurate indicator of the potential sentence for a specific defendant.
SOURCE: United States Attorney Middle District of Pennsylvania Office