Legal Opinion · Concurrence

State v. Maye

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided November 5, 1991No. 9114SC102Published

1Concurrence

Judge WYNN

concurring by separate opinion.

I write separately to emphasize, as pointed out by the majority, that the circumstances of this case do not allow us to address the issue of double jeopardy. Here, the trial judge entered judgment on the conviction of trafficking in cocaine by transportation and ordered prayer for judgment on the remaining convictions. As such, we do not have before us the double jeopardy or cumulative punishments concerns addressed in State v. Mebane, 101 N.C. App. 119, 398 S.E.2d 672 (1990). Thus, for example, we do not address the propriety of deciding on appeal the…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. State v. MebaneCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1990
  2. State v. MebaneCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1990

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

Powered by the Exa API