No plain error in the fact that the jury didn't decide the question of whether the weapon was brandished, an element of the increased sentence, since no reasonable finder of fact could have decided otherwise.
On remand from the Supreme Court, deft can raise claims arising from cases decided during the pendency of the direct appeal.
State crime of unarmed bank robbery is categorically a predicate crime of violence.
Although jury was erroneously instructed that accomplice liability attached for brandishing a firearm if the deft was aware of it at the time that it happened, error is insufficiently plain to justify reversal.
Where a deft is not advised that the later counseled brief supersedes the earlier pro se filing, the court can equitably consider arguments raised in the earlier filing.
Although a predicate was double-counted in the indictment, insufficiently plain error, as other predicate counts resulted in convictions.
Other challenges -- 10th Amendment, Commerce clause - sufficient evidence.
http://www2.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/111615p.pdf
Since 2011. An occasional commonplacing of the U.S. Circuit Courts of Appeal.
Neither an authoritative statement of the law nor legal advice. Quick work.