Legal Opinion · Dissent

State v. Malone

Court of Appeals of Arizona

Decided June 27, 1991No. 1 CA-CR 89-1077Published

1DissentGerber, Judge

I respectfully dissent. My concern is about the trial court’s repeated use of the same factor — the gun — to aggravate punishment.

The defendant here committed armed robbery and kidnapping while using a deadly weapon. Because of his weapon he was properly charged with armed robbery rather than robbery. Under A.R.S. § 13-1904, and by definition, armed robbery is an aggravated form of robbery, made so precisely by the presence of such a weapon. For that reason, armed robbery presents a sentence exposure greater than does robbery.

So far so good. The problem arises, however, when this same gun is…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. State v. BlyArizona Supreme Court · 1980
  2. State v. Garza RodriguezArizona Supreme Court · 1990
  3. State v. OrdunoArizona Supreme Court · 1989
  4. State ex rel. Romley v. HallCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1990
  5. State v. Perez LaraCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1991

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

Powered by the Exa API