He was also sentenced to a withheld sentence and three years of probation on the substantial battery, to run concurrent with the other term of probation. He brought a postconviction motion, alleging a multiplicity violation due to the two bail jumping convictions. That motion was denied and Anderson now appeals. This court independently reviews questions of constitutional fact, which require the application of constitutional principles to the facts of the case. We must determine whether the two counts of bail jumping in violation of a single bond are multiplicitous.
Multiplicity is defined as the charging of a single criminal offense in more than one count.
Because they violate the double jeopardy provisions of the state and federal constitutions, multiplicitous charges are impermissible. In analyzing a multiplicity issue, we employ a two-pronged test. The first prong requires that we determine whether the charged offenses are identical in law and fact. The charges are identical in law. The State does not dispute that they are identical in law.