If you plan to rob a bank and walk up to a teller with a gun in your pocket, you can be convicted of attempted armed robbery, even if you never ask for a penny, the Louisiana Supreme Court has ruled.

Justices reinstated the conviction of Leslie Otto Ordodi, 49, of New Iberia,

last week for the attempted armed robberies of two New Iberia banks on May 28, 2004.

Advertisement

The decision did not come without controversy, however, as two justices wrote strong dissents.

At issue is whether Ordodi committed “an overt act” toward robbing the banks, as is required to satisfy the charge of attempted armed robbery. “Mere preparation” does not constitute an attempt, according to state law.

“To me, you don’t begin a crime until you pull a gun or say, ‘Gimme the money,’” said Ordodi’s attorney, Richard Spears. “Then, you set the crime in motion.”

But searching or lying in wait for a victim while being armed with a dangerous weapon can be considered an attempt, according to state law, even if the weapon is not actually used.

It appears that is the logic the justices used in reinstating the conviction.

“A rational juror could have found proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant entered those banks with the specific intent to rob their employees...,” Justice Chet Traylor wrote, “but moved on in search of another bank whose employees he perceived were easier to rob.”

Prosecutor Bo Duhe said Ordodi was experiencing financial trouble at the time of the robberies, further proving his motive was to rob the banks.

“If you take one piece of evidence, it’s mere preparation,” Duhe said. “But when you put them all together and consider the situation he was in, all of the acts together add up to an act in furtherance.”

Chief Justice Pascal Calogero and Justice Catherine Kimball dissented from the majority’s ruling.

Kimball said while the majority speculated Ordodi left because the banks were crowded, prosecutors did not present any evidence suggesting he was worried by the number of people or went to the second bank hoping it would be less crowded.

“The evidence presented by the state shows only that (Ordodi) made preparations to commit armed robbery,” she wrote.

Ordodi removed his license plate prior to entering the first bank and left his truck running in the parking lot. He wore dark sunglasses and a baseball cap and carried a loaded .38 caliber revolver and a plastic bag into both banks, but never produced the weapon during either incident.

“None of these actions tend directly toward the commission of armed robbery,” Kimball wrote.

Spears agreed. He said several people he has spoken with have been troubled by the ruling as well.

“A lot of people find it disturbing that you can go to jail for thinking about doing something,” Spears said.

“This is a slippery slope. If you say this guy is guilty, where do we now draw the line?”

Spears said he intends to ask the Supreme Court for a rehearing. If that is not granted, Spears said he intends to appeal the matter to the U.S. Supreme Court.

“The odds are not great,” he said, “but I think the facts of this are awfully compelling.”

The Associated Press contributed to this report