Circuit split · criminal procedure
Whether the Blockburger same-elements test for determining if two offenses are the 'same offense' under the Double Jeopardy Clause should be given the interpretation announced by the majority
1 federal appellate case on this question, each acknowledging the disagreement in its own words.
- United States v. Davenport519 F3D 940
Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals · March 20, 2008
“First, the majority creates a circuit split by announcing a new interpretation of the test first applied in Blockburger v.” — Acknowledges a circuit split
Empirical analysis of this case →
The provision at issue
18 U.S.C. § 2252A — Certain activities relating to material constituting or containing child pornography
“(a) Any person who— (1) knowingly mails, or transports or ships using any means or facility of interstate or foreign commerce or in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce by any means, including by computer, any child pornography; (2) knowingly receives or distributes— (A) any child pornography using any means or facility of interstate or foreign commerce or that has been mailed, or has been shipped or transported in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce by any means, including by computer; or (B) any material that contains child …”Read the full section →
The other side of the split
Decisions the acknowledging court(s) named as the opposing or joined side, quoted in the acknowledging opinion's own words.
- Joined by · 1st Cir.United States v. Franchi-Forlando838 F.2d 585
- Joined by · 1st Cir.United States v. Ortiz-Alarcon917 F.2d 651
- Joined by · 1st Cir.United States v. Gomez-Ruiz931 F.2d 977
- Joined by · 4th Cir.United States v. Ahad985 F.2d 554
“Ahad, 985 F.2d 554 , 1993 WL 27384 , *1 (4th Cir.1993) (per curiam) (unpublished disposition) 1 (expressly adopting the reasoning and holding of Franchi-F orlando); see also United States v.” — United States v. Davenport, acknowledging the split
- Discussed · 9th Cir.United States v. Verduzco373 F.3d 1022
“Verduzco, 373 F.3d 1022 , 1028 (9th Cir.2004) (rejecting, in a different context, the argument that the term “element” should not encompass an affirmative defense as a “formalistic reading” of the term “element”).” — United States v. Davenport, acknowledging the split
What the split turns on
- Anchor precedents:
- Blockburger v. United States284 U.S. 299
- Statutes:
- 18 U.S.C. § 2252A(d)
- Doctrines & tests:
- Blockburger same-elements test
Cases are grouped by the legal question they announce a split on, classified from the court's own acknowledgment sentence. Verified acknowledgments only. Counter-side decisions are extracted from the acknowledging opinions' own text and linked only when the citation resolves in this corpus. See all circuit splits.