State v. Harkness

Supreme Court of South Carolina

State v. Harkness

341 S.E.2d 631, 288 S.C. 136, 1986 S.C. LEXIS 309

CourtSupreme Court of South Carolina

DecidedMarch 17, 1986

Docket22503

StatusPublished

Cited by8 cases

This text of 341 S.E.2d 631 (State v. Harkness) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of South Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State v. Harkness, 341 S.E.2d 631, 288 S.C. 136, 1986 S.C. LEXIS 309 (S.C. 1986).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam:

Appellant was convicted of robbery and petit larceny and sentenced to ten years and thirty days consecutively. We affirm the conviction and sentence for robbery but reverse the larceny conviction and vacate the sentence.

The testimony at trial showed that appellant and another man approached the prosecuting witness in a parking lot, grabbed and shoved her, jerked off both her necklaces, and knocked her down. Although it is apparent that appellant committed both robbery and the lesser-included offense of larceny, punishment for both offenses arising out of the same incident is double jeopardy. State v. Lawson, 279 S. C. 266, 305 S. E. (2d) 249 (1983).

Accordingly, the conviction for petit larceny is reversed and the sentence vacated, and the conviction and sentence for robbery are affirmed. State v. Plemmons, 286 S. C. 78, 332 S. E. (2d) 765 (1985); State v. Scipio, 283 S. C. 124, 322 S. E. (2d) 15 (1984).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Per Curiam:

Appellant was convicted of robbery and petit larceny and sentenced to ten years and thirty days consecutively. We affirm the conviction and sentence for robbery but reverse the larceny conviction and vacate the sentence.

The testimony at trial showed that appellant and another man approached the prosecuting witness in a parking lot, grabbed and shoved her, jerked off both her necklaces, and knocked her down. Although it is apparent that appellant committed both robbery and the lesser-included offense of larceny, punishment for both offenses arising out of the same incident is double jeopardy. State v. Lawson, 279 S. C. 266, 305 S. E. (2d) 249 (1983).

Accordingly, the conviction for petit larceny is reversed and the sentence vacated, and the conviction and sentence for robbery are affirmed. State v. Plemmons, 286 S. C. 78, 332 S. E. (2d) 765 (1985); State v. Scipio, 283 S. C. 124, 322 S. E. (2d) 15 (1984).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

341 S.E.2d 631, 288 S.C. 136, 1986 S.C. LEXIS 309, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-harkness-sc-1986.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack