stating that "an accused need not actually be armed with a deadly weapon to be convicted of robbery in the first degree"
How later courts described this case
- stating that "an accused need not actually be armed with a deadly weapon to be convicted of robbery in the first degree"
- “[A] circuit court is not required to resentence an inmate merely because it determines that the inmate is eligible for reconsideration of his or her sentence.”
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
I concur fully with the majority opinion, but I write specially to express my understanding of the main holdings of this opinion. First, a circuit court is not required
to find that an inmate is not eligible to have his sentence reconsidered simply because his underlying conviction was for an offense that has previously been statutorily defined as a violent offense. Second, although a circuit court may order an evaluation by the Department of Corrections, it is not required to do so. Third, although a circuit court may conduct a hearing on a motion for reconsideration of sentence, it is not required to do so. Fourth, although a circuit court must consider the factors that are before it at the time it rules on a motion for reconsideration, it is not required to make findings of fact as to the weight it gave to each factor.
WISE, J., concurs.