People v. Lutz

I respectfully dissent. Because both the statutory definition of aggravated robbery *186and the crime-of-violence statute required that the defendant be actually armed with a deadly weapon as an essential element of each charge, I view the jury’s guilty verdict on the aggravated robbery charge as inconsistent with the not guilty verdict on the crime-of-violence charge. I, therefore, would affirm the judgment of the court of appeals.

We have long followed the principle that inconsistent jury verdicts based on the identical fund of evidence will not be sanctioned. Thus, where two separate offenses…