Carter v. State, 28603
| Decision Date | 26 January 1951 |
| Docket Number | No. 28603,28603 |
| Parties | CARTER v. STATE. |
| Court | Indiana Supreme Court |
James C. Cooper, Public Defender, Rushville, for appellant.
J. Emmett McManamon, Atty. Gen., Frank E. Coughlin, Harold V. Whitelock, Deputy Attys. Gen., for appellee.
Appellant was charged by affidavit in three counts (1) with the crimes of robbery while armed with a deadly weapon, under § 10-4709, Burns' 1942 Replacement; (2) robbery, under § 10-4101, Burns' 1942 Replacement; and (3) automobile banditry, under § 10-4710, Burns' 1942 Replacement; all arising out of the identical robbery. A plea of not guilty was entered, there was a trial by jury, and a verdict of guilty was returned for robbery while armed with a deadly weapon and for robbery. Judgment on each count was entered, and appellant was sentenced on each count, the sentences to run concurrently.
The sole question presented is whether or not error was committed in entering judgment on the first and second counts of the affidavit. Appellant contends that robbery is contained in the offense of robbery while armed with a deadly weapon, and that he should have been found guilty and sentenced on the first count only. In the case of Kokenes v. State, 1938, 213 Ind. 476, 479, 480, 13 N.E.2d 524, 525, 526, robbery while armed and robbery were charged in separate counts arising out of the identical robbery. There was a verdict of guilty upon both counts, and judgment and sentence followed upon both counts. This court said:
'It does not follow, however, that a defendant may be convicted for committing a robbery and committing a robbery while armed, where the same identical robbery is involved. * * *
1
In the case now before this court the identical robbery is involved in both the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Richardson v. State
... ... this additional requirement to an independent state double jeopardy protection found in Article 1, Section 14 of the Indiana Constitution." Carter v. State, 686 N.E.2d 834, 838 (Ind.1997) ... Rather, it relied upon lesser-included jury instruction case law. See Tawney, 439 N.E.2d at 588 ... ...
-
McFarland v. State, 2-177A33
...Indiana has thereby taken the position that concurrent sentencing can also constitute multiple punishment. See also, Carter v. State, (1951) 229 Ind. 205, 96 N.E.2d 273 (defendant's chances of parole may be affected). Accordingly, most of the Indiana cases have specifically vacated the conv......
-
Carter v. State
...murders), the defendants assign, as further error, the multiple 'convictions' for one and the same homicide. They cite Carter v. State, (1951) 229 Ind. 205, 96 N.E.2d 273, as authority for their position. We note that we did say in that opinion that the jury should have returned a verdict o......
- Campbell v. State, 28704