Opinion ID: 1715287
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 20

Heading: Discharge and Use

Text: With that background, we turn to McBride's claim that he was twice put in jeopardy by being separately punished for both discharging and using the same firearm. The issue is resolved by McHenry, 250 Neb. at 635, 550 N.W.2d at 378, wherein we wrote: A determination of whether two convictions in a single trial lead to multiple punishment depends upon whether the legislature that designated the criminal statutory scheme intended that cumulative sentences be applied for conviction on both offenses. If the statute clearly and affirmatively indicates that the legislature intended that the defendant be punished cumulatively under both charges and the sentences for both charges are imposed in a single trial, the Double Jeopardy Clause is not offended. Section 28-1205(3) provides that the crime of using a deadly weapon to commit a felony shall be treated as [a] separate and distinct [offense] from the felony being committed, and sentences imposed under this section shall be consecutive to any other sentence imposed. See, also, State v. Mantich, 249 Neb. 311, 543 N.W.2d 181 (1996); State v. Marks, 248 Neb. 592, 537 N.W.2d 339 (1995). The quoted statutory language expressly provides that the Legislature intended the crime of using a deadly weapon to commit a felony to remain an independent offense from the underlying felony. Furthermore, the crime of using a deadly weapon to commit a felony applies to [a]ny person who uses a firearm ... to commit any felony. § 28-1205(1). Accordingly, there can be no question that the Legislature intended that one using a deadly weapon be subjected to cumulative punishments for committing the underlying felony and for the use of the weapon to commit it.