Opinion ID: 2104951
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: The legislature declined to treat the two provisions as the same offense.

Text: When the legislature created 3204(b) as a new offense, the legislature also amended 3202 to include dangerous crime[s] within its scope. [16] Therefore, the legislature was aware that it had created two separate statutory provisions that in many circumstances could apply simultaneously to the same conduct. See Albernaz v. United States, 450 U.S. 333, 341-342, 101 S.Ct. 1137, 1143-1144, 67 L.Ed.2d 275 (1981). The fact that the legislature chose to create 3204(b) as a new and separate offense at the same time it amended 3202 strongly indicates that the legislature did not intend to treat offenses subject to the enhanced penalty provision of 3202 and offenses defined by 3204(b) as the same offense. Moreover, at no time did the legislature clearly state, nor did it incorporate into either provision any suggestion that the two provisions should merge. [17]