Yelardy v. State

Summary

The Court affirmed the denial of Yelardy’s motion to correct his sentence, holding that his convictions and sentences for multiple robbery counts and separate firearm-possession counts did not violate double jeopardy. Multiple robbery convictions were permissible because multiple bank employees were victims, and the firearm offenses could be punished separately from the robbery offenses. The Court also explained that Yelardy’s challenge concerning two employees who did not relinquish property involved evidentiary sufficiency or jury-instruction issues, not an illegal-sentence claim cognizable under Rule 35(a).