Robert Maday Indicted in Alleged Escape and Armed Bank Robbery in 2009

December 2, 2011

The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) on December 2, 2011 released the following:

“CHICAGO— A Chicago area man who allegedly escaped from custody in Rolling Meadows and a day later committed an armed bank robbery in Bloomingdale before being recaptured was indicted on federal charges in connection with the alleged series of events in September 2009. The defendant, Robert Maday, was charged with escape, armed bank robbery, being a felon-in-possession of firearms, and two counts of using firearms during violent crimes in a five-count indictment that was returned by a federal grand jury late yesterday, Patrick J. Fitzgerald, United States Attorney for the Northern District of Illinois; and Robert D. Grant, Special Agent in Charge of the Chicago Office of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, announced today.

Maday, 41, formerly of Elk Grove Village, has remained in federal custody since he was recaptured on Sept. 18, 2009. He will be arraigned on a date still to be determined in U.S. District Court. Maday faces a mandatory minimum of 45 years and a maximum sentence up to life in prison if convicted of the three gun counts alone.

On Sept. 17, 2009, Maday was under a federal detention order when he allegedly escaped from the custody of two Cook County State’s Attorney’s Office investigators who were transporting him to the Cook County Courthouse in Rolling Meadows. One gun count alleges that Maday used two firearms during the escape—a Heckler and Koch USP .40-caliber semi-automatic pistol and a Smith and Wesson .38-caliber SPL revolver.

On Sept. 18, 2009, Maday allegedly took approximately $32,975 in the armed robbery of the First American Bank branch, located at 80 Stratford Dr., in Bloomingdale. A second gun count alleges that Maday used the same two firearms during the bank robbery. A third gun count alleges that Maday illegally possessed both weapons after having previously been convicted of a felony. The indictment seeks forfeiture of both weapons and 18 rounds of ammunition that were seized when Maday was arrested. He was apprehended after leading police on a high-speed chase and crashing a stolen car on Illinois Highway 59 in West Chicago.

The armed bank robbery count carries a maximum sentence of 25 years and the escape count carries a maximum of five years in prison. The felon-in-possession of a firearm count alleges that Maday would be eligible to be sentenced as an armed career criminal, which carries a mandatory minimum 15-year prison term. A first conviction for using a firearm during a violent crime carries a mandatory consecutive term of five years in prison and conviction on a second count carries a mandatory consecutive sentence of 25 years in prison, with a maximum of any number of years up to life. If convicted, the court must impose a reasonable sentence under federal sentencing statutes and the advisory United States Sentencing Guidelines.

The government is being represented in court by Assistant U.S. Attorney Andrianna Kastanek. The public is reminded that an indictment contains only charges and is not evidence of guilt. The defendant is presumed innocent and is entitled to a fair trial at which the government has the burden of proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.”


Douglas McNabb – McNabb Associates, P.C.’s
Federal Criminal Defense Attorneys Videos:

Federal Crimes – Be Careful

Federal Crimes – Be Proactive

Federal Crimes – Federal Indictment

Federal Crimes – Detention Hearing


To find additional federal criminal news, please read Federal Crimes Watch Daily.

Douglas McNabb and other members of the U.S. law firm practice and write and/or report extensively on matters involving Federal Criminal Defense, INTERPOL Red Notice Removal, International Extradition and OFAC SDN Sanctions Removal.

The author of this blog is Douglas McNabb. Please feel free to contact him directly at or at one of the offices listed above.

Blagojevich Asks For New Trial, Cites Judicial Bias

July 26, 2011

Chicago Tribune on July 26, 2011 released the following:

“Former Gov. Rod Blagojevich, convicted last month of wire fraud, bribery, attempted extortion and conspiracy in his second federal public corruption trial, filed a motion late Monday for another retrial, citing numerous instances of alleged judicial bias and error that helped the prosecution “strip away the effective aspects of the defense case.”

“Virtually every error in this trial stemmed from the fact that this Court deprived Blagojevich of the presumption of innocence and exhibited bias against the defense,” the motion asserted. “The Court formed a closed mind to the evidence and made findings of fact.”

The motion said that “the government did not only benefit from the first trial, it used every opportunity to strip away the effective aspects of the defense case. … The Court rubber-stamped the government’s requests.”

The litany of criticisms in the 158-page document touched on everything from jury selection to Blagojevich’s attorneys’ long-held argument that more of the secretly-recorded phone calls that were at the heart of the government case should be played.

The motion also noted that U.S. District Judge James Zagel ruled against Blagojevich at nearly every turn.

His attorneys also zeroed in on Blagojevich’s decision to testify at the second trial — arguing that while Zagel had assured Blagojevich’s defense team that taking the stand would allow Blagojevich the chance to explain his behavior, his rulings during the testimony prevented that.

Blagojevich did not testify during his first trial last year in which a jury convicted him of one of 24 counts against him — that he lied to the FBI. The jury deadlocked on the rest of the charges, leading to the second trial and his sweeping conviction last month on an additional 17 counts.

As a part of the defense motion for a new trial filed Monday, his attorneys included an affidavit signed July 25 by Blagojevich in which he says that he decided to testify the second time around after conferring with his attorneys about statements Zagel made during a May 20 sidebar. According to the affidavit, Zagel said that Blagojevich would be allowed to testify to the fact that he didn’t think anything he was doing was illegal and that none of the people he spoke with told him differently.

In the motion filed Monday, though, Blagojevich’s attorneys said Zagel’s rulings during Blagojevich’s several days of testimony did not allow him to get that point across.

“The Court explicitly told defense counsel that the only path to acquittal was through Blagojevich’s testimony,” the filing reads. “Yet when Blagojevich finally took the stand, he was bamboozled by the Court’s rulings and assertions throughout the trial.”

The ruling noted that the government was allowed to address details of the calls “ad nauseum” with witnesses but that Blagojevich was not allowed to offer up explanations for certain aspects of the calls.

The government is expected to respond to the motion next month.”

To find additional federal criminal news, please read The Federal Crimes Watch Daily.

Douglas McNabb and other members of the U.S. law firm practice and write extensively on matters involving Federal Criminal Defense, INTERPOL Red Notice Removal, International Extradition and OFAC SDN List Removal.

The author of this blog is Douglas McNabb. Please feel free to contact him directly at or at one of the offices listed above.

Bookmark and Share