300 P.3d 61
Idaho Ct. App.2013Background
- May 9, 2010 domestic dispute; Moffat allegedly choked, hair-pulled, pushed girlfriend; police observed injuries; charged with misdemeanor domestic battery (I.C. § 18-918(3)(b)).
- Follow-up interview and photos led to a later charge of attempted strangulation (I.C. § 18-923(1)); Moffat pled guilty to the domestic battery charge in October 2010.
- Information filed in October 2010; district court denied Moffat’s motion to dismiss the attempted strangulation charge based on double jeopardy; Moffat entered a conditional guilty plea and was sentenced.
- On appeal, the court vacates the attempted strangulation conviction and holds that misdemeanor domestic battery and attempted strangulation constitute one offense under Blockburger.
- The court concludes the attempted strangulation charge cannot be separated from the domestic battery charge as a matter of double jeopardy in this single incident.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether multiple prosecutions violate double jeopardy under Blockburger | Moffat: offenses merge; there is one offense | State: separate elements justify two offenses | Yes; they constitute one offense under Blockburger |
| Whether the acts were part of one continuing transaction | All acts arose from same incident | Different acts could be separate; still single offense | Yes; continuing-transaction analysis supports one offense |
| Whether Idaho and U.S. double jeopardy analyses diverge here | Idaho Constitution may differ | Blockburger analysis governs under U.S. Constitution | No need to decide Idaho-Constitution issues; U.S. analysis controls here |
| Whether the district court erred in applying Blockburger to merge the offenses | Offense elements differ | No extra elements distinguishable under Whalen/Whalen-logic | Yes; offenses merge under Blockburger; district court erred |
Key Cases Cited
- Blockburger v. United States, 284 U.S. 299 (1932) (two offenses require proof of different facts to avoid double jeopardy)
- Brown v. Ohio, 432 U.S. 161 (1977) (two offenses arising from same act may be same offense for double jeopardy)
- State v. Corbus, 151 Idaho 368, 256 P.3d 776 (Ct. App. 2011) ( Idaho Blockburger approach to double jeopardy)
- Whalen v. United States, 445 U.S. 684 (1980) (statutory elements and alternatives must be narrowed to relevant parts)
- State v. Flegel, 151 Idaho 525, 261 P.3d 519 (2011) (Idaho Constitution double jeopardy analysis guidance)