Opinion ID: 2070942
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: The lesser-included offense.

Text: The government argues, in the alternative, that if we retain the common law rule as set forth in the commentaries, we should remand the case to the trial court with instructions to reduce Little's accessoryship convictions to AAF to an appropriate lesser-included offense. We agree. As we recently noted in Willis v. United States, 692 A.2d 1380, 1383 (D.C.1997), federal appellate courts appear to have uniformly concluded that they may direct the entry of judgment for a lesser included offense when a conviction for a greater offense is reversed on grounds that affect only the greater offense [quoting Rutledge v. United States, 517 U.S. 292, 306, 116 S.Ct. 1241, 1250, 134 L.Ed.2d 419 (1996)]. The same principle is applicable to this court. Assault with a dangerous weapon is a lesser-included offense of second-degree murder while armed. Hebron v. United States, 625 A.2d 884, 885-86 (D.C.1993). [14] The felony of ADW had been completed when Bailey fired his pistol at the decedents, and the shooting occurred before Little transported Bailey away from the scene. [15] The jury having convicted Little of the greater offense of AAF to murder while armed, it necessarily found him guilty of the lesser-included offense of AAF to ADW. Under these circumstances, there is no need for a new trial.