 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Taylor v. State1/25/2000
charged as occurring on those four days could be sustained by proof of money taken on other days as well. This example may clarify the issue. A conviction on Count I which charges embezzlement on August 5, 1993, could be sustained by proof of embezzlement the week before and the week after. So excluding only August 5 from Count V may not be enough. As already pointed out, the proof on the three counts for which a guilty verdict was delivered did limit itself to the dates in question.
. Even if there is a potential multiplicity problem in having a "catch-all" such as Count V, the issue is moot. Taylor was acquitted of Count V.
. I agree with the affirming of this conviction. With respect for the majority, this separate opinion better represents my reasons for doing so.
McMILLIN, C.J., IRVING AND THOMAS, JJ., JOIN THIS SEPARATE OPINION.
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Mississippi DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|