Defendant commits an armed robbery in county A, obtaining stolen goods that he transports to county B. May the defendant be prosecuted and punished for armed robbery in county A and be separately prosecuted and punished for possession of stolen goods in county B? Since this is a law blog, you already know the answer: It depends. The general rule. In most circumstances, a defendant may not be punished for both the felonious taking of goods and their possession. That rule is derived from an examination of legislative intent rather than principles of double jeopardy, which is not implicated when each offense contains an element the other lacks. The North Carolina Supreme Court concluded in State v. Perry, 305 N.C. 225 (1982), overruled in part on other grounds, State v. Mumford, 364 N.C. 394 (2010) (discussed here), that “although it could have done so, the Legislature, by creation of the statutory offense of possession of stolen property, did not intend to punish an individual for both [the stealing of the property and possession of the property stolen].” Perry explained that the legislature created the offense of possession of stolen property (G.S. 14-71.1, 14-72) to facilitate the prosecution of individuals found in possession of such property, including known dealers in stolen goods, who otherwise escaped prosecution because the State could not prove that they stole the property (G.S. 14-72) or that they received the property from another person who had stolen it (G.S. 14-71, 14-72). The possession of stolen property statutes provide [...]
Faculty Coordinators
