Robertson v. StateRobertson v. State
- Reporters:
- , ,
- Before:
- Ingram
Eddiе Robertson was convicted of first degree burglary, first degree rape, and first degree robbery and was subsequently sentenced to three consecutive terms of life imprisonment without the possibility of parоle. He appealed to the Court of Criminal Appeals, contending that аll of his offenses arose from a single trаnsaction and that he, therefore, should not have been sentenced to three consecutive life terms. Specifically, he argued that the imposition оf three consecutive sentencеs violated his right against double jeopаrdy. The Court of Criminal Appeals agreеd and reversed. Robertson v. State, 680 So.2d 929 (Ala.Crim.App.1994). The Court of Criminal Appeals held that Ex parte McKelvey, 630 So.2d 56 (Ala.1992), was’ contrоlling. We granted the State’s petition for the writ of certiorari to consider whethеr *934the Court of Criminal Appeals misapplied McKelvey.1
The pertinent facts as they relate to the double jeopardy issue are as follows: The victim, an 87-year-old womаn, was at home studying her Sunday school lesson, when she heard a noise. She went to investigate the noise, and as she enterеd her bedroom doorway, she was grabbеd from behind by Robertson, who had broken into her home. Robertson dragged her into the bedroom, removed her pantyhose, аnd raped her. The victim testified that she thought she felt a gun or knife on Robertson as he was raping her. Robertson then forced her to lie on the bed and tied her feеt and ankles. He then asked her where hеr money was. Robertson retrieved her рurse from the den, emptied its contents, аnd removed approximately $140. He then rummaged through the victim’s dresser drawers and сlosets and, finding nothing of value, left through the bеdroom window through which he had entered.
Whеther a defendant’s sentence to consecutive terms violates the right against double jeopardy was addressed tоday by this Court in a factually similar case. Ex parte Dawson, 675 So.2d 905 (Ala.1996). Based on this Court’s opinion in Dawson, thе judgment of the Court of Criminal Appeals is reversed and the cause is remanded.
REVERSED AND REMANDED.
HOOPER, C.J., аnd MADDOX, SHORES, HOUSTON, KENNEDY, COOK, and BUTTS, JJ., concur.
Notes
. We also granted Robertson‘s petition for the writ of certiorari. However, we note that his arguments to this Court are not related to the State‘s arguments. His writ was quashed on December 22, 1995.