Blockburger test in North Carolina

26 North Carolina opinions name it 2 courts 1981–2026 3 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by North Carolina courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (11)

Case	Followed	Cited
State v. Gardnergreen nc · 1986 · cited in 16 North Carolina opinions naming this issue, 1987–2026 2 sentences 2026Nevertheless, “double jeopardy does not prohibit multiple punishment for offenses when one is included within the other under the Blockburger test if both are tried at the same time and if the legislature intended for both offenses to be separately punished.” State v. Gardner, 315 N.C. 444, 454 , 340 S.E.2d 701, 709 (1986). 2026Nevertheless, “double jeopardy does not prohibit multiple punishment for offenses when one is included within the other under the Blockburger test if both are tried at the same time and if the legislature intended for both offenses to be separately punished.” State v. Gardner, 315 N.C. 444, 454 , 340 S.E.2d 701, 709 (1986).	7	16
Blockburger v. United Statesgreen scotus · 1931 · cited in 10 North Carolina opinions naming this issue, 1986–2019 2 sentences 2004The Blockburger test provides: “[W]here the same act or transaction constitutes a violation of two distinct statutory provisions, the test to be applied to determine whether there are two offenses or only one, is whether each provision requires proof of an additional fact which the other does not.” Blockburger v. United States, 284 U.S. 299, 304 , 76 L. 2004The Blockburger test provides: “[W]here the same act or transaction constitutes a violation of two distinct statutory provisions, the test to be applied to determine whether there are two offenses or only one, is whether each provision requires proof of an additional fact which the other does not.” Blockburger v. United States, 284 U.S. 299, 304 , 76 L.	4	10
United States v. Dixongreen scotus · 1993 · cited in 4 North Carolina opinions naming this issue, 1999–2022 2 sentences 2007"The same-elements test, sometimes referred to as the `Blockburger' test, inquires whether each offense contains an element not contained in the other; if not, they are the `same offence' and double jeopardy bars additional punishment and successive prosecution." Dixon, 509 U.S. at 696 , 113 S.Ct. at 2856 , 125 L.Ed.2d at 568 . 2007"The same-elements test, sometimes referred to as the `Blockburger' test, inquires whether each offense contains an element not contained in the other; if not, they are the `same offence' and double jeopardy bars additional punishment and successive prosecution." Dixon, 509 U.S. at 696 , 113 S.Ct. at 2856 , 125 L.Ed.2d at 568 .	4	4
Missouri v. Huntergreen scotus · 1983 · cited in 8 North Carolina opinions naming this issue, 1986–2014 2 sentences 2001If what purports to be two offenses actually is one under the Blockburger test, double jeopardy prohibits successive prosecutions, . . . (citations omitted) but, as was made clear in Missouri v. Hunter, 459 U.S. 359 , 103 S.Ct. 673 , 74 L.Ed.2d 535 (1983), double jeopardy does not prohibit multiple punishment for offenses when one is included within the other under the Blockburger test if both are tried at the same time and if the legislature intended for both offenses to be separately punished .... 2001If what purports to be two offenses actually is one under the Blockburger test, double jeopardy prohibits successive prosecutions, . . . (citations omitted) but, as was made clear in Missouri v. Hunter, 459 U.S. 359 , 103 S.Ct. 673 , 74 L.Ed.2d 535 (1983), double jeopardy does not prohibit multiple punishment for offenses when one is included within the other under the Blockburger test if both are tried at the same time and if the legislature intended for both offenses to be separately punished ....	2	8
State v. Strohauergreen ncctapp · 1987 · cited in 2 North Carolina opinions naming this issue, 2022–2022 2 sentences 2022App. 68, 73 , 351 S.E.2d 823, 827 (1987) (citations omitted). ¶9 The Blockburger test is not violated if the same conduct underlies two offenses, each of which requires proof of a fact of the crime that the other does not. 2022App. 68, 73 , 351 S.E.2d 823, 827 (1987) (citations omitted). ¶9 The Blockburger test is not violated if the same conduct underlies two offenses, each of which requires proof of a fact of the crime that the other does not.	2	2
Grady v. Corbinred scotus · 1990 · cited in 2 North Carolina opinions naming this issue, 2022–2022 2 sentences 2022United States v. Dixon, 509 U.S. 688, 689 (1993) (overruling Grady v. Corbin, 495 U.S. 508, 526 (1990), which had allowed the same conduct to bar prosecution because Grady was “wholly inconsistent with [the Supreme Court’s] precedents and with the clear common-law understanding of double jeopardy”). 2022United States v. Dixon, 509 U.S. 688, 689 (1993) (overruling Grady v. Corbin, 495 U.S. 508, 526 (1990), which had allowed the same conduct to bar prosecution because Grady was “wholly inconsistent with [the Supreme Court’s] precedents and with the clear common-law understanding of double jeopardy”).	2	2
State v. Clarkgreen nc · 1989 · cited in 2 North Carolina opinions naming this issue, 2022–2022 2 sentences 2022NOFFSINGER 2022-NCCOA-794 Opinion of the Court on any theory and “it is proper for the trial court to submit the issue of the defendant’s guilt of that charge to the jury on each of the theories of first degree murder supported by substantial evidence at trial.” State v. Clark, 325 N.C. 677, 684 , 386 S.E.2d 191, 195 (1989). ¶ 14 We apply the Blockburger test and Diaz exception to determine whether double jeopardy principles bar prosecution of Defendant for first-degree murder. 1. 2022NOFFSINGER 2022-NCCOA-794 Opinion of the Court on any theory and “it is proper for the trial court to submit the issue of the defendant’s guilt of that charge to the jury on each of the theories of first degree murder supported by substantial evidence at trial.” State v. Clark, 325 N.C. 677, 684 , 386 S.E.2d 191, 195 (1989). ¶ 14 We apply the Blockburger test and Diaz exception to determine whether double jeopardy principles bar prosecution of Defendant for first-degree murder. 1.	2	2
State v. Evangelistagreen nc · 1987 · cited in 2 North Carolina opinions naming this issue, 2022–2022 2 sentences 2022State v. Evangelista, 319 N.C. 152, 158 , 353 S.E.2d 375, 380 (1987). ¶ 19 The Blockburger test is satisfied if a defendant is convicted of an underlying felony and first-degree murder, based on a theory different from felony murder, because each offense requires proof of fact that the other does not. 2022State v. Evangelista, 319 N.C. 152, 158 , 353 S.E.2d 375, 380 (1987). ¶ 19 The Blockburger test is satisfied if a defendant is convicted of an underlying felony and first-degree murder, based on a theory different from felony murder, because each offense requires proof of fact that the other does not.	2	2
State v. Ezellgreen ncctapp · 2003 · cited in 2 North Carolina opinions naming this issue, 2009–2014 2 sentences 2014If what purports to be two offenses is actually one under the Blockburger test, double jeopardy prohibits prosecution for both. 159 N.C. 2014If what purports to be two offenses is actually one under the Blockburger test, double jeopardy prohibits prosecution for both. 159 N.C.	1	2
State v. Baileygreen ncctapp · 2003 · cited in 2 North Carolina opinions naming this issue, 2003–2005 2 sentences 2003App. 80 , 577 S.E.2d 683 (2003), and concluded that the presumption raised by the Blockburger test can be rebutted by a “clear indication of legislative intent” and that such intent must be “respected, regardless of the outcome of the Blockburger test.” Id. at 86, 577 S.E.2d at 688 . 2003App. 80 , 577 S.E.2d 683 (2003), and concluded that the presumption raised by the Blockburger test can be rebutted by a “clear indication of legislative intent” and that such intent must be “respected, regardless of the outcome of the Blockburger test.” Id. at 86, 577 S.E.2d at 688 .	1	2
Iannelli v. United Statesgreen scotus · 1975 · cited in 1 North Carolina opinions naming this issue, 1981–1981 2 sentences 1981"If each [offense] requires proof of a fact that the other does not, the Blockburger test is satisfied, notwithstanding a substantial overlap in the proof offered to establish the crimes." Iannelli v. United States, 420 U.S. 770 , 785 n. 17, 95 S.Ct. 1284, 1294 , 43 L.Ed.2d 616, 627 (1975). 1981"If each [offense] requires proof of a fact that the other does not, the Blockburger test is satisfied, notwithstanding a substantial overlap in the proof offered to establish the crimes." Iannelli v. United States, 420 U.S. 770 , 785 n. 17, 95 S.Ct. 1284, 1294 , 43 L.Ed.2d 616, 627 (1975).	1	1

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

Case	Negative	Cited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in North Carolina. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (8)

Case	Cited	Years
Brown v. Ohio green scotus · 1977 2 sentences 1987If what purports to be two offenses actually is one under the Blockburger test, double jeopardy prohibits successive prosecutions, Brown v. Ohio, 432 U.S. 161 [ 97 S.Ct. 2221 ], 53 L.Ed.2d 187 (1977); Harris v. Oklahoma, 433 U.S. 682 [ 97 S.Ct. 2912 ], 53 L.Ed.2d 1054 (1977); Illinois v. Vitale, 447 U.S. 410 [ 100 S.Ct. 2260 ], 65 L.Ed.2d 228 (1980).... 1987If what purports to be two offenses actually is one under the Blockburger test, double jeopardy prohibits successive prosecutions, Brown v. Ohio, 432 U.S. 161 [ 97 S.Ct. 2221 ], 53 L.Ed.2d 187 (1977); Harris v. Oklahoma, 433 U.S. 682 [ 97 S.Ct. 2912 ], 53 L.Ed.2d 1054 (1977); Illinois v. Vitale, 447 U.S. 410 [ 100 S.Ct. 2260 ], 65 L.Ed.2d 228 (1980)....	5	1986–2022
Diaz v. United States green scotus · 1912 2 sentences 2022In Diaz v. United States, the United States Supreme Court recognized an exception in allowing successive prosecutions for two offenses requiring proof of the same facts. 223 U.S. 442 , 448–49 (1912). 2022In Diaz v. United States, the United States Supreme Court recognized an exception in allowing successive prosecutions for two offenses requiring proof of the same facts. 223 U.S. 442 , 448–49 (1912).	2	2022–2022
State v. Sandlin green nc · 1983 2 sentences 1990Applying the Blockburger test, the court held in Sanderson that "possession under G.S. 90-95(a) does not require proof of any additional facts beyond those required under G.S. 90-95(h)(1), therefore convictions under both statutes violate defendants' protection against double jeopardy, and the convictions for the lesser included offenses should be vacated." State v. Sanderson, 60 N.C.App. 604, 610 , 300 S.E.2d 9, 14 , disc. rev. denied, 308 N.C. 679 , 304 S.E.2d 759 (1983). 675 After State v. Sanderson , the North Carolina Supreme Court held in State v. Gardner, 315 N.C. 444 , 340 S.E.2d 701 1990Applying the Blockburger test, the court held in Sanderson that "possession under G.S. 90-95(a) does not require proof of any additional facts beyond those required under G.S. 90-95(h)(1), therefore convictions under both statutes violate defendants' protection against double jeopardy, and the convictions for the lesser included offenses should be vacated." State v. Sanderson, 60 N.C.App. 604, 610 , 300 S.E.2d 9, 14 , disc. rev. denied, 308 N.C. 679 , 304 S.E.2d 759 (1983). 675 After State v. Sanderson , the North Carolina Supreme Court held in State v. Gardner, 315 N.C. 444 , 340 S.E.2d 701	2	1990–1990
State v. Sanderson green ncctapp · 1983 2 sentences 1990Applying the Blockburger test, the court held in Sanderson that "possession under G.S. 90-95(a) does not require proof of any additional facts beyond those required under G.S. 90-95(h)(1), therefore convictions under both statutes violate defendants' protection against double jeopardy, and the convictions for the lesser included offenses should be vacated." State v. Sanderson, 60 N.C.App. 604, 610 , 300 S.E.2d 9, 14 , disc. rev. denied, 308 N.C. 679 , 304 S.E.2d 759 (1983). 675 After State v. Sanderson , the North Carolina Supreme Court held in State v. Gardner, 315 N.C. 444 , 340 S.E.2d 701 1990Applying the Blockburger test, the court held in Sanderson that "possession under G.S. 90-95(a) does not require proof of any additional facts beyond those required under G.S. 90-95(h)(1), therefore convictions under both statutes violate defendants' protection against double jeopardy, and the convictions for the lesser included offenses should be vacated." State v. Sanderson, 60 N.C.App. 604, 610 , 300 S.E.2d 9, 14 , disc. rev. denied, 308 N.C. 679 , 304 S.E.2d 759 (1983). 675 After State v. Sanderson , the North Carolina Supreme Court held in State v. Gardner, 315 N.C. 444 , 340 S.E.2d 701	2	1990–1990
Shields v. NATIONWIDE MUTUAL FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY green nc · 1983 2 sentences 1990Applying the Blockburger test, the court held in Sanderson that "possession under G.S. 90-95(a) does not require proof of any additional facts beyond those required under G.S. 90-95(h)(1), therefore convictions under both statutes violate defendants' protection against double jeopardy, and the convictions for the lesser included offenses should be vacated." State v. Sanderson, 60 N.C.App. 604, 610 , 300 S.E.2d 9, 14 , disc. rev. denied, 308 N.C. 679 , 304 S.E.2d 759 (1983). 675 After State v. Sanderson , the North Carolina Supreme Court held in State v. Gardner, 315 N.C. 444 , 340 S.E.2d 701 1990Applying the Blockburger test, the court held in Sanderson that "possession under G.S. 90-95(a) does not require proof of any additional facts beyond those required under G.S. 90-95(h)(1), therefore convictions under both statutes violate defendants' protection against double jeopardy, and the convictions for the lesser included offenses should be vacated." State v. Sanderson, 60 N.C.App. 604, 610 , 300 S.E.2d 9, 14 , disc. rev. denied, 308 N.C. 679 , 304 S.E.2d 759 (1983). 675 After State v. Sanderson , the North Carolina Supreme Court held in State v. Gardner, 315 N.C. 444 , 340 S.E.2d 701	2	1990–1990
Harris v. Oklahoma green scotus · 1977 2 sentences 1987If what purports to be two offenses actually is one under the Blockburger test, double jeopardy prohibits successive prosecutions, Brown v. Ohio, 432 U.S. 161 [ 97 S.Ct. 2221 ], 53 L.Ed.2d 187 (1977); Harris v. Oklahoma, 433 U.S. 682 [ 97 S.Ct. 2912 ], 53 L.Ed.2d 1054 (1977); Illinois v. Vitale, 447 U.S. 410 [ 100 S.Ct. 2260 ], 65 L.Ed.2d 228 (1980).... 1987If what purports to be two offenses actually is one under the Blockburger test, double jeopardy prohibits successive prosecutions, Brown v. Ohio, 432 U.S. 161 [ 97 S.Ct. 2221 ], 53 L.Ed.2d 187 (1977); Harris v. Oklahoma, 433 U.S. 682 [ 97 S.Ct. 2912 ], 53 L.Ed.2d 1054 (1977); Illinois v. Vitale, 447 U.S. 410 [ 100 S.Ct. 2260 ], 65 L.Ed.2d 228 (1980)....	2	1986–1987
Illinois v. Vitale green scotus · 1980 2 sentences 1987If what purports to be two offenses actually is one under the Blockburger test, double jeopardy prohibits successive prosecutions, Brown v. Ohio, 432 U.S. 161 [ 97 S.Ct. 2221 ], 53 L.Ed.2d 187 (1977); Harris v. Oklahoma, 433 U.S. 682 [ 97 S.Ct. 2912 ], 53 L.Ed.2d 1054 (1977); Illinois v. Vitale, 447 U.S. 410 [ 100 S.Ct. 2260 ], 65 L.Ed.2d 228 (1980).... 1987If what purports to be two offenses actually is one under the Blockburger test, double jeopardy prohibits successive prosecutions, Brown v. Ohio, 432 U.S. 161 [ 97 S.Ct. 2221 ], 53 L.Ed.2d 187 (1977); Harris v. Oklahoma, 433 U.S. 682 [ 97 S.Ct. 2912 ], 53 L.Ed.2d 1054 (1977); Illinois v. Vitale, 447 U.S. 410 [ 100 S.Ct. 2260 ], 65 L.Ed.2d 228 (1980)....	2	1986–1987
State v. Fernandez green nc · 1997 2 sentences 2003Id. at 19 , 484 S.E.2d at 362 . 2003Id. at 19 , 484 S.E.2d at 362 .	1	2003–2003

Statutes the citing opinions construe

NC § N.C. Gen. Stat. § 14-17 (5) NC § N.C. Gen. Stat. § 14-39 (5) NC § N.C. Gen. Stat. § 14-33 (4) NC § N.C. Gen. Stat. § 14-72 (4) NC § N.C. Gen. Stat. § 14-71.1 (3) NC § N.C. Gen. Stat. § 90-95 (3)

Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.

Where else courts name it

TX 409 (1982–2026) FL 171 (1981–2026) NM 151 (1991–2026) LA 139 (1980–2025) WA 133 (1982–2026) TN 130 (1977–2026) OH 105 (1980–2026) CT 96 (1985–2026) VA 89 (1979–2026) MI 88 (1978–2026) AL 71 (1977–2025) KY 66 (1984–2026) IN 65 (1978–2020) MD 61 (1962–2022) DC 57 (1981–2026) MO 57 (1977–2024) MS 54 (1981–2023) PA 53 (1982–2025) IL 48 (1977–2023) WI 37 (1979–2023) ID 34 (1980–2025) WV 32 (1983–2025) MT 32 (1981–2024) WY 30 (1987–2023) NC 26 (1981–2026) NJ 25 (1982–2019) CO 23 (1980–2017) DE 22 (1980–2025) IA 22 (1983–2026) SC 21 (1990–2021) NV 20 (1984–2024) NY 20 (1978–2019) AZ 19 (1981–2024) SD 19 (1988–2019) RI 17 (1980–2013) NE 16 (1991–2025) VT 16 (1998–2024) GA 14 (1979–2023) AR 14 (1993–2024) ME 14 (1992–2025) OK 11 (1981–2024) HI 9 (1991–2005) MN 9 (1979–2013) OR 8 (1982–2020) CA 7 (2001–2020) MA 7 (1981–2023) VI 7 (1997–2013) KS 6 (1989–2006) AK 4 (1995–2024) ND 4 (2006–2023) GU 2 (2023–2025) NH 2 (1984–2006)

Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check

Your account

Appearance