Crawley v. State
This text of 229 A.2d 839 (Crawley v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Delaware primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The defendant was convicted of burglary in the fourth degree.1 Upon appeal, the conviction was affirmed. See Del., 219 A. 2d 158. Thereafter, under Superior Court Rule 35(a), Del.C.Ann.2, the defendant moved for correction of his sentence on the ground that it was illegal. Upon denial of that motion, the defendant appeals.
The defendant contends that his sentence was illegal because certain evidence used in the burglary case had previously been the subject of charges of obtaining money under false pretenses, to which he had pleaded guilty in the Municipal Court. In the earlier prosecution, the defendant was charged with attempting to cash certain checks that had been stolen from the premises which were the subject of the burglary charge. Asserting that the same evidence, i. e., possession of the stolen checks, was unlawfully used against him in both charges, the defendant points to 11 Del.C. § 5543 and claims violation of that Statute as the ground for his claim that his sentence on the burglary conviction was illegal.
The defendant’s position is untenable. 11 Del.C. § 554 refers to the closely related offenses of obtaining property under false pretenses and larceny, the purpose [841]*841of the Statute being to connect the two offenses so that a technical failure of proof as to the lesser offense will not result in an unjust acquittal. But the crime of burglary is not thus closely related to the offense of obtaining property under false pretenses, either by the basic nature of the offenses or by the Statute. Hence, the subsequent prosecution of the defendant for burglary, and sentence thereon, was not rendered illegal by § 554 because of the earlier prosecution involving the same evidence.
Accordingly, the judgment below will be affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
229 A.2d 839, 1967 Del. LEXIS 226, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/crawley-v-state-del-1967.