The following morning, he returned to Ms. Lewis' home to rob her. Later on the same day, defendant turned himself in to law enforcement officers, apprising the officers of the murder, which had not been discovered. In exchange for his guilty plea, the State agreed that, even though it would recommend consecutive sentences, it would not oppose defendant's request for concurrent sentences. After careful inquiry of the defendant, the district court found that the plea was entered into freely, voluntarily, and knowingly, and pronounced defendant guilty of felony murder and aggravated robbery. No departure was requested, discussed, or granted.
Life is the only sentence of imprisonment for felony murder.
Defendant makes no claim of error on any of the grounds set forth in this statute. Rather, the sole issue raised is abuse of judicial discretion in imposing the sentences consecutively. We shall first consider the State's contention that this court lacks jurisdiction to entertain this appeal. Defendant contends these two cases were wrongly decided. There is no claim that the requirements and limitations relative to the imposition of consecutive sentences set forth in said statute are applicable.