...punishment was stated in Blockburger v. United States, 284 US 299, 304 (1932): "The applicable rule is that where the same act or transaction constitutes...requires proof of a fact which the other does not. ..." This test emphasizes the elements of the two crimes. "If each requires proof of a fact that the...

...wording of the statutes alone. Thus, in Blockburger itself the Court stated that "the applicable rule is that where the same act or transaction constitutes...requires proof of a fact which the other does not." 284 US, at 304 (emphasis added). More recently, we framed the test as whether " 'each statute requires...

...abstracting mail matter from an authorized depository for such matter, describe distinct offenses. Id. Where the same act or transaction constitutes a violation of two distinct statutory provisions, test to be applied to determine whether there are two offenses Is whether each requires proof of fact»...

...345, 351. Each of the offenses created requires proof of a different element. The applicable rule is that where the same act or transaction constitutes...requires proof of a fact which the other does not. Gavieres v. United States, 220 US 338, 342, and authorities cited. In that case this court quoted from...

...follows: Each of the offenses created requires proof of a different element. The applicable rule is that where the same act or transaction constitutes...requires proof of a fact which the other does not Applying this test in the instant case, it is apparent from the pleadings and from the evidence adduced...

...S Ct 180). Where the same act or transaction is relied upon as constituting two separate offenses, the test to be applied to determine whether there are two offenses or only one, is whether each offense requires proof of a fact or element not required by the other. The different element in Charge...

...three counts with cumulative punishment. Blockburger states the "same evidence" test as follows : 8 Where the same act or transaction constitutes a violation...only one, is whether each provision requires proof of an additional fact which the other does not. It seems beyond argument that the appropriate sentence...

...Blockburger v. United States, 284 US 299, 304 (1932), it was stated, so far as here relevant, that "the test to be applied to determine whether there...two offenses or only one, is whether each provision [ie, each charge] requires proof of a fact which the other does not." (Emphasis added.) 1 The test...

...Blockburger v. United States, 284 US 299, 304 (1932), it was stated, so far as here relevant, that "the test to be applied to determine whether there...two offenses or only one, is whether each provision [ie, each charge] requires proof of a fact which the other does not." (Emphasis added.) 1 The test...

...person to be punished twice for the same offense. The applicable rule is that, where the same action or transaction constitutes a violation of two distinct...only one is whether each provision requires proof of an additional fact which the other does not. Blockburger v. United States, 284 US 299, 304 (1932)....