Three Harrisburg Men Charged Federally With Hobbs Act Robbery And Use Of A Firearm During A Crime Of Violence
The United States Attorney's Office for the Middle District of Pennsylvania announced that Tory Dobbin, age 41, George Stoney, age 40, and Nathaniel Mosely, age 43, all from Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, were indicted today by a federal grand jury in Harrisburg on charges of robbery of a business engaged in interstate commerce (Hobbs Act robbery), and Use of a Firearm During a Crime of Violence.
According to United States Attorney Peter J. Smith, allegedly, on December 3, 2013, the trio, each armed with firearms robbed the Cracker Barrel restaurant located on Brindle Road in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. They allegedly exited the restaurant with just over $8,000, where they were met by Susquehanna Township Police and fled on foot. After a brief foot chase, all three were apprehended nearby. The trio allegedly stole a car from a Ford dealership in Sunbury, Pennsylvania the night before to be used as a getaway car.
This case was investigated by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Capital City Safe Streets Task Force and the Susquehanna Township Police Department. The case is being prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorney Daryl F. Bloom.
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 guilty is imposed by the Judge after consideration of the applicable federal sentencing statutes and the Federal Sentencing Guidelines.
In this case, the maximum penalty under the federal statute is 20 years’ imprisonment, a term of supervised release following imprisonment, and a $250,000 fine. 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.