Horace McKinney, Petitioner v. State of Florida, Respondent — Lewis, J., Dissenting

Summary

Justice Lewis dissented from the treatment of McKinney's convictions for grand theft and robbery with a firearm arising from a single episode. The dissent reasoned that both offenses punish the same primary evil—the deprivation of another's property—and that the robbery charge merely adds force to the theft, making cumulative punishment constitutionally impermissible. The dissent also criticized the rigid statutory-elements approach as undermining legislative-intent analysis and double-jeopardy protection.