Lesser Included Offenses and Double Jeopardy
Lesser included offenses and double jeopardy are increasingly important areas in the field of criminology. The two concepts are confusing, therefore much attention is needed for their intersection. In criminal law, a lesser included offense is a less serious crime within a serious crime (Rudstein, 2004). A defendant has to commit the lesser included offense before committing the serious offense “under block burger”. Punishment for both offenses would be prohibited by the double jeopardy clause.
There exist three ways in which a court determines whether a crime is a lesser included offense. The first approach is the statutory elements test. It is the most known method among courts and it implies that a lesser included offense must contain all the elements of the greater offense. Secondly is the evidentiary approach. It states that a lesser included offense would depend on the exact evidence presented as a trial as a serious offense. Finally is the cognate
Pleading test. Under this approach, a lesser included offense must contain certain shared elements as a serious offense but not all the same elements. Judges need to consider the above instances when making judgments.
Most courts maintain that double jeopardy does not prevent multiple convictions. Therefore, under certain circumstances, one could be convicted of multiple crimes for a single act. The best way to ascertain this is by determining the elements of each crime. When a person is charged with a crime, the crime has to comprise elements that must be proven by the court. A defendant is found guilty of a single crime if one crime alleges the same elements of another crime (Law, 2013). However, if a person is charged with elements, not in another crime he is charged with, he is likely to plead guilty to both the offenses. Multiple conviction arising from a single act does not necessarily rely on statutory elements tests, instead the courts make an independent assessment for the offense.
Once a defendant is acquitted of a lesser included offense, the government would not bring another prosecution for a greater offense since it is considered the same offense. Double jeopardy prohibits punishment for both the greater and lesser included offense. For the Fifth Amendment to apply, the court has to place a defendant in jeopardy. This would protect an individual from being subjected to embarrassment, insecurity, living in anxiety as well as enhancing the claim that even the innocent may be guilty. For instance, when law enforcement finds new evidence for a defendant after a jury’s verdict, the prosecution cannot charge him again despite the evidence proving their guilt. It remains to be the major protection for criminal defendants.
A person can be convicted for multiple crimes for a single act as mentioned above. This would depend on the type of crime as provided in the Ethiopian criminal code dealing with concurrence. According to Law (2013), Rudstein (2004) Instances where multiple prosecutions would occur include the law on concurrence in crime committed against several people. This implies that one who harms several people should be punished severely as opposed to when he harms one person. Another instance is concurrence in cases of crime committed against several people. That is, the same criminal action causes the same harm against the right of more people, he is charged under the “principle of multiplicity”.
Conclusion
The law might vary from one state to another, therefore one needs to be acquainted with such laws. With the rise in a number of the statutory offenses, prosecutors increasingly charge multiple offenses from a criminal act.
References
Rudstein, D. S. (2004). Double jeopardy : a reference guide to the United States Constitution. Praeger.
Law, F. (2013). Double Jeopardy Basics [YouTube Video]. In YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YwOgfuQsfg4