Login

Login

To access this feature, please Log In or Register for your Casebriefs Account.

Add to Library

Add

Search

Login
Register

State v. Yates

    Powered by 310 S.E.2d 805 (S.C. 1982)
    Law Students: Don’t know your Bloomberg Law login? Register here

    Brief Fact Summary.

    Yates appealed his death penalty conviction claiming that a defendant should not be committed to the death sentence if the person did not commit the murder personally.

    Synopsis of Rule of Law.

    A person can be sentenced to death because an accomplice committed murder during a felony.

    Points of Law - Legal Principles in this Case for Law Students.

    Moral turpitude is an act of baseness, vileness, or depravity in the private and social duties which a man owes to his fellow man, or society in general, contrary to the accepted and customary right and duty between man and man.

    View Full Point of Law
    Facts.

    Yates and an accomplice robbed a general store with a gun and a knife. Yates shot the owner of the store and his accomplice stabbed the owner’s wife to death. Yates was sentenced to death and appealed his conviction.

    Issue.

    Whether a person can be sentenced to death because an accomplice committed murder during a felony?

    Held.

    Yes. Yates’ conviction and death sentence are upheld. Yates committed an armed robbery where the victim died, and Yates exhibited his disdain for human life by shooting the storeowner, with the intent to cause serious bodily injury or death. Despite not killing the storeowner’s wife, Yates exhibited that he was willing to kill if the storeowner didn’t cooperate.

    Discussion.

    The death penalty is appropriate in instances of capital murder where aggravating circumstances display the defendant’s disregard for human life. Aggravating circumstances are facts in the case that display the defendant’s disdain for the live surrounding his actions.


    Create New Group

      Casebriefs is concerned with your security, please complete the following