10 District of Columbia opinions name it 1 courts 1981–2008 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by District of Columbia 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.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Whalen v. United Statesgreen2 sentences2005“In [this] jurisdiction, the Block-burger rule ... has been codified as an express declaration of legislative intent in D.C.Code § 23-112 [(2002).]” 6 Byrd v. United States, 598 A.2d 386, 389 (D.C.1991) (en banc) (citing Whalen v. United States, 445 U.S. 684, 691-92 , 100 S.Ct. 1432 , 63 L.Ed.2d 715 (1980)). 2005“In [this] jurisdiction, the Block-burger rule ... has been codified as an express declaration of legislative intent in D.C.Code § 23-112 [(2002).]” 6 Byrd v. United States, 598 A.2d 386, 389 (D.C.1991) (en banc) (citing Whalen v. United States, 445 U.S. 684, 691-92 , 100 S.Ct. 1432 , 63 L.Ed.2d 715 (1980)). | 1 | 2 |
Hanna v. United Statesgreen2 sentences2008See Hanna, 666 A.2d at 857 (PFCV requires possession of a firearm during a crime of violence while PPW requires possession of a “specifically prohibited weapon For all the foregoing reasons, appellant’s convictions are hereby Affirmed. 3 . 2008See Hanna, 666 A.2d at 857 (PFCV requires possession of a firearm during a crime of violence while PPW requires possession of a “specifically prohibited weapon For all the foregoing reasons, appellant’s convictions are hereby Affirmed. 3 . | 1 | 1 |
Byrd v. United Statesgreen2 sentences2005“In [this] jurisdiction, the Block-burger rule ... has been codified as an express declaration of legislative intent in D.C.Code § 23-112 [(2002).]” 6 Byrd v. United States, 598 A.2d 386, 389 (D.C.1991) (en banc) (citing Whalen v. United States, 445 U.S. 684, 691-92 , 100 S.Ct. 1432 , 63 L.Ed.2d 715 (1980)). 2005“In [this] jurisdiction, the Block-burger rule ... has been codified as an express declaration of legislative intent in D.C.Code § 23-112 [(2002).]” 6 Byrd v. United States, 598 A.2d 386, 389 (D.C.1991) (en banc) (citing Whalen v. United States, 445 U.S. 684, 691-92 , 100 S.Ct. 1432 , 63 L.Ed.2d 715 (1980)). | 1 | 1 |
Joiner v. United Statesgreen2 sentences1993See Joiner v. United States, 585 A.2d 176 , 179 & n. 2 (D.C.1991); see also Briscoe v. United States, 528 A.2d 1243, 1245 (D.C.1987) (Blockburger inapplicable to merger of two violations of same statute); Bean, supra, 576 A.2d at 189 n. 3. 1993See Joiner v. United States, 585 A.2d 176 , 179 & n. 2 (D.C.1991); see also Briscoe v. United States, 528 A.2d 1243, 1245 (D.C.1987) (Blockburger inapplicable to merger of two violations of same statute); Bean, supra, 576 A.2d at 189 n. 3. | 1 | 1 |
Ray v. United Statesgreen2 sentences1993Ray v. United States, 620 A.2d 860, 864 (D.C.1993). 1993Ray v. United States, 620 A.2d 860, 864 (D.C.1993). | 1 | 1 |
Briscoe v. United Statesgreen2 sentences1993See Joiner v. United States, 585 A.2d 176 , 179 & n. 2 (D.C.1991); see also Briscoe v. United States, 528 A.2d 1243, 1245 (D.C.1987) (Blockburger inapplicable to merger of two violations of same statute); Bean, supra, 576 A.2d at 189 n. 3. 1993See Joiner v. United States, 585 A.2d 176 , 179 & n. 2 (D.C.1991); see also Briscoe v. United States, 528 A.2d 1243, 1245 (D.C.1987) (Blockburger inapplicable to merger of two violations of same statute); Bean, supra, 576 A.2d at 189 n. 3. | 1 | 1 |
Albernaz v. United Statesgreen1 sentence1981Moreover the Supreme Court has recognized that “[t]he Blockburger test is a ‘rule of statutory construction’ and because it serves as a means of discerning congressional purpose the rule should not be controlling where, for example, there is a clear indication of contrary legislative intent.” Albernaz v. United States, supra - U.S. at -, 101 S.Ct. at 1141 (Block-burger test applied because nothing in legislative history discloses contrary intent). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in District of Columbia. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Nixon v. United States
green
2 sentences2006Nixon, 730 A.2d at 152 . 2006Nixon, 730 A.2d at 152 . | 1 | 2006–2006 |
United States v. Dalton
green
1 sentence1996Id. at 354-55 . | 1 | 1996–1996 |
Bean v. United States
green
2 sentences1993See Joiner v. United States, 585 A.2d 176 , 179 & n. 2 (D.C.1991); see also Briscoe v. United States, 528 A.2d 1243, 1245 (D.C.1987) (Blockburger inapplicable to merger of two violations of same statute); Bean, supra, 576 A.2d at 189 n. 3. 1993See Joiner v. United States, 585 A.2d 176 , 179 & n. 2 (D.C.1991); see also Briscoe v. United States, 528 A.2d 1243, 1245 (D.C.1987) (Blockburger inapplicable to merger of two violations of same statute); Bean, supra, 576 A.2d at 189 n. 3. | 1 | 1993–1993 |
Blockburger v. United States
green
2 sentences1991Absent clear legislative intent, in situations “where 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 a fact which the other does not.” Blockburger v. United States, 284 U.S. 299, 304 , 52 S.Ct. 180, 182 , 76 L.Ed. 306 (1932). 2 If only one of the statutes *1374 requires an additional element, the Block-burger test is not satisfied and the offenses merge. 1991Absent clear legislative intent, in situations “where 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 a fact which the other does not.” Blockburger v. United States, 284 U.S. 299, 304 , 52 S.Ct. 180, 182 , 76 L.Ed. 306 (1932). 2 If only one of the statutes *1374 requires an additional element, the Block-burger test is not satisfied and the offenses merge. | 1 | 1991–1991 |
Iannelli v. United States
green
2 sentences1987Brown v. Ohio, 432 U.S. 161, 166 , 97 S.Ct. 2221, 2225-26 , 53 L.Ed.2d 187 (1977) (citing Iannelli v. United States, 420 U.S. 770 , 785 n. 17, 95 S.Ct. 1284 , 1293-94 n. 17, 43 L.Ed.2d 616 (1975)). 1987Brown v. Ohio, 432 U.S. 161, 166 , 97 S.Ct. 2221, 2225-26 , 53 L.Ed.2d 187 (1977) (citing Iannelli v. United States, 420 U.S. 770 , 785 n. 17, 95 S.Ct. 1284 , 1293-94 n. 17, 43 L.Ed.2d 616 (1975)). | 1 | 1987–1987 |
Brown v. Ohio
green
2 sentences1987Brown v. Ohio, 432 U.S. 161, 166 , 97 S.Ct. 2221, 2225-26 , 53 L.Ed.2d 187 (1977) (citing Iannelli v. United States, 420 U.S. 770 , 785 n. 17, 95 S.Ct. 1284 , 1293-94 n. 17, 43 L.Ed.2d 616 (1975)). 1987Brown v. Ohio, 432 U.S. 161, 166 , 97 S.Ct. 2221, 2225-26 , 53 L.Ed.2d 187 (1977) (citing Iannelli v. United States, 420 U.S. 770 , 785 n. 17, 95 S.Ct. 1284 , 1293-94 n. 17, 43 L.Ed.2d 616 (1975)). | 1 | 1987–1987 |
Ball v. United States
green
2 sentences1986Congress could not have intended to allow two convictions for the same conduct, even if sentenced under only one; Congress does not create criminal offenses having no sentencing component. 105 S.Ct. at 1672 . 1986Congress could not have intended to allow two convictions for the same conduct, even if sentenced under only one; Congress does not create criminal offenses having no sentencing component. 105 S.Ct. at 1672 . | 1 | 1986–1986 |
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.
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.