Court Opinion

ID: 9781401
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-30 16:36:26.575675+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:34:26.103788
License: Public Domain

JOHNSON, J.:
Concur in Results.
11 This case is not totally unusual. The facts are in dispute and the jury had to decide who to believe. The facts show Appellant did not have a firearm at the time of the robbery, and Appellant, along with others, ran from the seene of the robbery. There is a conflicting evidence relating to when Appellant fell to the ground and surrendered.
T 2 Obviously, parties involved in an armed holdup take a great deal of responsibility, even one for the other. One should know that guns could be fired and someone could be hurt or killed. I would not affirm a murder conviction for one who did not have a weapon and surrendered at the first request to do so, if another party was killed by a law officer because that party did not surrender. If a party clearly breaks off his involvement in the armed robbery, he should not at that point be subjected to charges for what happens to the other parties thereafter.
T3 I therefore concur in result because there is evidence that Appellant did not surrender early in the chase. He likely surrendered because of the K-9 dogs, rather than halting when ordered to do so.