Legal Opinion · Dissent

State v. Gardner

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided February 18, 1986No. 390A84Published

1DissentJustice ExUM

I concede that under Missouri v. Hunter, 459 U.S. 359, 74 L.Ed. 2d 535 (1983), the Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution does not preclude punishing this defendant for both felonious breaking or entering and felonious larceny, of which, we must assume, the breaking or entering is an essential element, so long as our legislature so intended.

I think Hunter was incorrectly decided. It is based, in my view, on a misapplication of principles formulated by the United *464States Supreme Court in earlier cases and designed to resolve double jeopardy questions…

2Cases cited23 opinions

  1. Blockburger v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1931
  2. Brown v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
  3. Missouri v. HunterSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
  4. Whalen v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
  5. Albernaz v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1981

18 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