Opinion ID: 2575468
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: Issue 4: Did the district court err in denying Pham's motion for judgment of acquittal as to the six counts of aggravated robbery because they were multiplicitous?

Text: Pham argues that multiplicity bars his convictions of the six counts of aggravated robbery except that of Bau Tran. He further argues that an insufficiency of evidence bars even that count, i.e., there was no evidence that any one of the three gunmen took the bracelet and necklace from the house. In a partial concession to Pham's multiplicity claim, the State abandons any argument that convictions on all six counts can survive. It alleges that two convictions  one count for each daughter  should be affirmed because they each lost jewelry. The State also rejects any argument that the convictions are not supported by sufficient evidence, emphasizing it does not have to locate the missing jewelry to prove its case.