Court Opinion

ID: 9547312
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 17:45:22.229451+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:17:35.463095
License: Public Domain

FRANCHINI, Chief Justice, concurring in part, dissenting in part. 41. I concur in parts I, II, TV and V. I do not concur in part III and that portion of part VT that allows sentencing for both armed robbery and unlawful taking of the vehicle. In my view, the actions of defendant were clearly unitary. There is no difference between asportation of property on the one hand and unlawful taking of a vehicle which is property on the other. Armed robbery of the keys to the truck resulted in the unlawful taking of the truck. Virtually no time elapsed between these actions. I would vacate the sentence for unlawful taking of a vehicle in part IV and affirm the remainder of the case in toto.