Court Opinion

ID: 9849092
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-24 04:34:37.62216+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:19:00.954639
License: Public Domain

Justice Lake
concurring in part and dissenting in part.
I concur as to the conviction of and sentence for armed robbery in Case No. 70-CR-2250.
I dissent as to the conviction of and sentence for assault with a deadly weapon inflicting serious injury in Case No. 70-CR-2250A for the reasons set forth in my concurring opinion in State v. Richardson, 279 N.C. 621, 638, 185 S.E. 2d 102, 115.
Here, the shooting of Harrelson occurred while the robbery was in progress and as part of it, which distinguishes this case from State v. Richardson, supra, where the robbery was complete before the shooting of the victim occurred. Harrelson being named in the indictment for armed robbery, as a victim thereof whose life was endangered by the defendant’s use of the pistol as the means of perpetrating the robbery, the State cannot, in my opinion, use the same assault again as an element of another criminal offense against Harrelson.