Brown v. State
Opinions
Reexamination on order of the United States Supreme Court
This case together with several others1 was ordered reexamined in light of Albernaz v. United States, 450 U.S. -, 101 S.Ct. 1137, 67 L.Ed.2d 275 (1981). Since all of the courts of appeals rulings were based upon our ruling in Sours v. State, 593 S.W.2d 208 (Mo.banc 1980) (Sours I) or Sours v. State, 603 S.W.2d 592 (Mo.banc 1980) (Sours II), the cases were all ordered transferred to this Court. Our examination of the double jeopardy issue made in light of Albemaz pursuant to the orders of the United States Supreme Court, appears in State v. Haggard, 619 S.W.2d 44 (Mo.banc 1981).
The original opinion filed by the Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District, Brown v. State, 607 S.W.2d 801 (Mo.App.1980), is approved and affirmed and by reference made a part of this opinion. Sours v. State, 603 S.W.2d 592 (Mo.banc 1980) (Sours II), cert. denied, Missouri v. Sours, - U.S. -, 101 S.Ct. 953, 67 L.Ed.2d 118 (1981); and State v. Haggard, 619 S.W.2d 44 (Mo.banc 1981).
The judgment on appellant’s 27.26 motion is reversed, and this cause is remanded with directions to enter a judgment denying appellant’s motion as to the judgment and sentence for robbery in the first degree. The court is directed to enter judgment vacating the judgment and sentence in the armed criminal action count, Count II.
Footnotes
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
619 S.W.2d 68 (Brown v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.