Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Chapman v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama

Decided August 7, 2009No. CR-07-1360Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partWindom, Judge

I agree with the majority’s holding that the State presented sufficient evidence to sustain Chapman’s conviction for third-degree burglary, a violation of § 13A-7-7, Ala.Code 1975. For the reasons that follow, however, I disagree with the majority’s holding that Chapman’s convictions for third-degree burglary, a violation of *1129§ 13A-7-7, Ala.Code 1975, and attempted criminal surveillance, violations of §§ 13A-4-2 and 18A-11-32, Ala.Code 1975, violate the Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution. I also disagree with the majority’s holding that these two…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Blockburger v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1931
  2. North Carolina v. PearceSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
  3. United States v. WilsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
  4. Schiro v. FarleySupreme Court of the United States · 1994
  5. United States v. SchalesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2008

12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API