Opinion ID: 1097950
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 18

Heading: violation of the bar of double jeopardy.

Text: The proposed contentions to be presented in the proposed petition to the lower court under this Claim were fully discussed in the opinion of Wheat v. State, supra , from which no petition for rehearing was filed. It is pointed out that the proof in the two cases was different in that the evidence in the case sub judice is uncontradicted that the vehicle and its contents were owned by Mr. Mayer, not Mrs. Mayer. As pointed out in the final opinion, this Court cannot speculate on a jury's deliberation, but that a sufficient explanation of the different penalty verdicts easily could have been the requirement of the state proving the underlying felony. Regardless of this, we are here barred from considering the request in Claim I, as these requests were fully discussed and determined in the opinion in Wheat v. State, supra .