Opinion ID: 2271140
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: We Decline to Adopt Strict Statutory Elements Approach and Retain Fact-Based Approach Embraced in Perry.

Text: We are aware of arguments that a Blockburger-type strict statutory elements approach should govern questions of which offenses a trial court may properly instruct the jury on as lesser-included offenses of charged offenses. [39] But we decline to adopt such a strict statutory elements approach here, especially in light of Hall's failure clearly to advocate such an approach until after the trial was over. We acknowledge a strict statutory elements approach to deciding lesser-included instruction issues might seem more consistent with our use of that same approach to determining lesser-included offenses for purposes of double jeopardy. We also recognize a strict statutory elements approach might appear to offer more certainty and judicial economy. But a strict statutory elements approach has its own disadvantages. [40] Most importantly, that approach may deprive a defendant of an opportunity for a desired lesser-included offense instruction because of differences in statutory elements even where the defendant is willing to concede that additional elements of uncharged offenses are not really at issue in the case. So we decline to adopt a strict statutory elements approach to determining whether a trial court can properly instruct a jury on an uncharged offense as a lesser-included offense of a charged offense.