Opinion ID: 1098497
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: may the sentences, imposed consecutively, exceed the defendant's actuarial life expectancy?

Text: One other problem requires some discussion. Both of the statutes dealing with the crimes here involved authorize the imposition of a life sentence upon conviction if the jury shall so determine. Miss. Code Ann. §§ 97-3-53; 97-3-65 (Supp. 1989). In each of these convictions, therefore, the jury having been unable to agree on life imprisonment as the appropriate sentence, the court must impose some lesser sentence than life. Friday v. State, 462 So.2d 336, 339 (Miss. 1985); Warren v. State, 456 So.2d at 738-39; Brooks v. State, 236 So.2d 751, 754 (Miss. 1970). Since both of these crimes grew out of a series of violent acts by one individual toward another individual in an unbroken chain of events, may the total of the sentences imposed by the court amount to more than the actuarial life expectancy of the defendant? We have carefully considered this matter and have concluded that each sentence is to be imposed without respect to the other. We think it is clear under the statute. Miss. Code Ann. §§ 99-7-2; 99-19-21 (Supp. 1989) [2] . If this matter were not so treated, circumstances might well arise where it will be impossible for the State to impose any meaningful sentence where more than one crime was committed. Harper v. State, 463 So.2d 1036, 1041 (Miss. 1985). CONVICTION ON COUNT I, KIDNAPPING, AFFIRMED; CONVICTION ON COUNT II, RAPE, AFFIRMED; REMANDED FOR SENTENCING HEARING. ROY NOBLE LEE, C.J., HAWKINS and DAN M. LEE, P.JJ., and PRATHER, ROBERTSON, SULLIVAN, ANDERSON and PITTMAN, JJ., concur.