Carter v. StateCarter v. State
Without youth court certification, a fifteen year old juvenile (appellant Carter), was convicted of armed robbery under
Placed squarely before us for interpretation is
We recognize the general rule of construction that statutory exceptions are to be strictly or narrowly construed in favor of the accused. Given a strict construction, the statute which confers exclusive jurisdiction upon circuit courts,
The appellant also states his argument another way elsewhere in his brief, as follows:
Since armed robbery is no longer punishable by life imprisonment or death, but only by life imprisonment, it does not fall within the Youth Court exceptions set forth in
section 43-21-31 .
He cites several cases as authority for his argument that this Court has heretofore interpreted
Cases from other jurisdictions are cited as authority for the argument that the phrase “punishable by sentence of death or life imprisonment” (language taken from a Missouri case) embraces only those offenses having as “sole alternatives” punishment of life imprisonment or death, and does not embrace offenses carrying possible sentences of less than life imprisonment as a minimum sentence. Such holdings do not reflect sound reasoning when applied to our jurisprudence including our statutes and their history. In construing
Carter was charged with the crime of armed robbery under
We find no error in the lower court‘s construction of
AFFIRMED.
GILLESPIE, C.J., PATTERSON and INZER, P. JJ., and SMITH, ROBERTSON, SUGG, WALKER and LEE, JJ., concur.