Opinion ID: 1141622
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Did the Prosecution Prove One of King's Previous Convictions was for a Crime of Violence?

Text: King argues here that his conviction of armed robbery is not necessarily a conviction for a crime of violence since armed robbery can be committed without physical violence. This Court has not heretofore held that armed robbery is a crime of violence for purposes of Miss. Code Ann. § 99-19-83 (Supp. 1987). While this Court has yet to hold armed robbery as a crime of violence, per se, we have assumed as much in McLamb v. State, 456 So.2d 743 (Miss. 1984), where we held proof insufficient to support sentencing under § 99-19-83 because only McLamb's latest conviction, that being a conviction of armed robbery, was for a crime of violence. In McQueen v. State, 473 So.2d 971, 973 (Miss. 1985), this Court dismissed a void for vagueness claim concerning what is a crime of violence under Miss. Code Ann. § 99-19-83. The Court cited language from numerous other jurisdictions holding that violence is synonymous with force, and neither requires actual harm, damages or pain. Certainly, force would include robbery by display of a deadly weapon. We hold that armed robbery is a crime of violence per se, and thus his sentence as an habitual offender under Miss. Code Ann. § 99-19-83 is appropriate.