tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21633793.post2649143832895990391..comments2023-12-12T03:19:42.467-05:00Comments on CYB3RCRIM3: Multiple Images of Child Pornography: 1 Crime or Many?Susan Brennerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17575138839291052258noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21633793.post-78515656866354292132009-12-12T18:20:07.865-05:002009-12-12T18:20:07.865-05:00Not to be a stickler, but Blockburger doesn't ...Not to be a stickler, but Blockburger doesn't set out the test for multiplicity; Blockburger is only a test for determining if two statutes reach the same conduct. Multiplicity, as you explain in the post, involves multiple charges under the same statute, not two different statutes. The test for multiplicity is whether the legislature intended the facts underlying each count to make up a separate unit of prosecution. See Sanabria v. United States, 437 U.S. 54, 69-71 & n.24 (1978); Bell v. United States, 349 U.S. 81, 81, 83-84 (1955); see also Ladner v. United States, 358 U.S. 169, 173 (1958) (propriety of charging multiple counts of assault rests on the legislative intent in enacting the statute). <br /><br />I agree with you about the diverse results on the question among the federal and state courts. And trying to come up with a sensible explanation for the various results is made even more difficult because of the different terms used in the particular statutes.Bractonnoreply@blogger.com