Davis v. State

¶ 12. I agree with the majority that this case must be reversed and remanded, but not for the reason it cites. The majority would reverse Davis’s receiving-stolen-property conviction because a separate grand-larceny count — a count upon which Davis was actually acquitted at trial — was also charged in the indictment. But any initial problem with the dual charges in the indictment was obviated when the jury acquitted Davis of grand larceny. Because jeopardy has attached to the count he was acquitted of, there is no longer danger of dual convictions or sentences for stealing and receiving the…