State v. Tanberg
Court of Appeals of Washington
1Opinion of the CourtColeman, J.
Double jeopardy protects persons from multiple punishments for the same crime. The key consideration in analyzing a double jeopardy claim is to determine *136what punishment the legislature intended. In making this determination, courts employ the same evidence test. Under that test, if the two crimes each have an essential element that is not an element of the other crime, the crimes are not the same in law. Absent clear contrary intent by the legislature, imposing punishments for both crimes does not violate double jeopardy. Here, the appellant argues that his sentence violated double jeopardy…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Blockburger v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1931
- United States v. DixonSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
- State v. CalleWashington Supreme Court · 1995
- State v. VladovicWashington Supreme Court · 1983
- State v. BresolinCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1975
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- State v. FreemanWashington Supreme Court · 2005
- State v. FreemanWashington Supreme Court · 2005
- State Of Washington v. Shelly ArndtCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2017