Issue

Multiple conspiracies—sufficiency of evidence—separate and distinct agreements

Summary

In a criminal prosecution in which defendant was charged with two different conspiracies–to commit robbery with a dangerous weapon and to commit felonious breaking and entering–based on one sequence of events where the victim was threatened at gunpoint in her apartment, the trial court's denial of defendant's motion to dismiss one of the conspiracy charges was proper because the State presented sufficient evidence from which a jury could conclude that defendant formed multiple conspiracies, based on separate agreements with his co-conspirators to, first, rob the victim and, subsequently, to break and enter the victim's apartment. Therefore, the decision of the Court of Appeals vacating defendant's conviction for conspiracy to commit robbery with a dangerous weapon was reversed and the matter remanded with instructions to reinstate defendant's conviction for that offense.

Summary from the North Carolina Reports digest (official subject index). Read the opinion →