Opinion ID: 1890965
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: sentence enhancement and merger

Text: Baham argues, and the government concedes, that the ten-year mandatory minimum sentence enhancement for armed robbery and AAWA should be vacated and remanded with instructions to enter a five-year mandatory minimum sentence on each of those counts. Baham's enhancement was based on a previous conviction for being an accessory after the fact to assault with intent to commit robbery. Being such an accessory, however, is not listed as a crime of violence or dangerous crime in the statute which defines those terms and authorizes sentence enhancements based upon them, D.C.Code § 22-3201 (1996). [18] We therefore agree that Baham's enhancement should have been five years, rather than ten, for the armed robbery and AAWA convictions, and thus we remand for resentencing of Baham on those counts. The government also concedes that the ADW convictions of both appellants merge with their AAWA convictions because ADW is a lesser included offense of AAWA. See Gathy, 754 A.2d at 919. Appellants are also correct that ADW is a lesser included offense of armed robbery when the assault is committed in order to effectuate the robbery. See Simms v. United States, 634 A.2d 442, 447 (D.C. 1993); Owens v. United States, 497 A.2d 1086, 1096 (D.C.1985), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 1085, 106 S.Ct. 861, 88 L.Ed.2d 900 (1986). The acts which constituted the assault and the robbery were not detached incidents but a continuing course of... conduct, Glymph, 490 A.2d at 1160, and at no time, either at trial or on appeal, has the government argued that the assault was the product of a fresh impulse which would preclude merger. See Simms, 634 A.2d at 447. We hold accordingly that the convictions of ADW merge with both the AAWA and armed robbery convictions, and that on remand the ADW convictions should be vacated. However, the AAWA convictions do not merge with the armed robbery convictions and thus should remain undisturbed.