Court Opinion

ID: 9641450
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 17:32:08.099907+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:05:13.127620
License: Public Domain

KELLER, P.J.,
concurring.
I join the opinion of the Court except to the extent that it specifies a particular procedure for protecting appellant from violation of his double jeopardy rights. The State should be prohibited from putting on evidence of a single theft that could have been proved under the original indictment. But jeopardy has not attached to the “the one constituent theft offense that most closely resembles” the one pled (whatever that might mean) or any other particular theft that the State could have proved under the indictment. To suggest that the procedure mandated by the Court is the only proper procedure is contrary to our on-or-about jurisprudence.