State v. R. Carr

Summary

The court affirmed the denial of the Carr brothers' post-mandate motions for sentencing because their appellate mandates finally affirmed their capital convictions and death sentences without leaving unresolved capital-sentencing issues. The court held that alternative capital-murder counts merged into single convictions, that the sentencing pronouncements and statutory findings therefore applied to the affirmed convictions, and that the defendants could not use post-mandate motions to raise new noncapital sentencing claims. The court also held that the reversal of certain noncapital convictions did not make Jonathan Carr's sentence illegal because his primary sentencing offense remained affirmed.