Document: 432 U.S. 161 97 S.Ct. 2221 53 L.Ed.2d 187 Nathaniel BROWN, Petitioner,v.State of OHIO. No. 75-6933. Argued March 21, 1977. Decided June 16, Syllabus The Double Jeopardy Clause the Fifth Amendment, applied to States through Fourteenth held bar prosecution and punishment for crime stealing an automobile following lesser included offense operating same vehicle without owner's consent. Pp. 164-170. (a) "(W)here act or transaction constitutes a violation two distinct statutory provisions, test be determine whether there are offenses only one, is each provision requires proof fact which other does not," Blockburger v. United States, 284 299, 304, 52 180, 182, 76 L.Ed. 306. In line with that test, generally forbids successive cumulative greater offense. 166-169. (b) Here, though Ohio Court Appeals properly under state law joyriding (taking consent) auto theft (joyriding intent permanently deprive owner possession) constitute "the offense" within meaning Clause, it erroneously concluded petitioner could convicted both crimes because charges against him had focused on different parts 9-day interval between petitioner's taking car his apprehension. There was still one law, specification dates in cannot alter he twice placed jeopardy Amendments. 169-170. Reversed. Robert Plautz, Cleveland, Ohio, petitioner. George J. Sadd, respondent. Mr. Justice POWELL delivered opinion Court. 1 question this case Amendment bars 2 * On November 29, 1973, petitioner, Brown, stole 1965 Chevrolet from parking lot East Ohio. Nine days later, December 8, Brown caught driving Wickliffe, Wickliffe police charged "joyriding" consent Rev.Code Ann. § 4549.04(D) (1973, App. 342).1 complaint "on about . H. did unlawfully purposely take, drive operate certain motor wit; Gloria Ingram ." 3. pleaded guilty charge sentenced 30 jail $100 fine. 3 Upon release January 1974, returned Cleveland face further charges, February 5 indicted by Cuyahoga County grand jury. indictment counts, first charging 29th day 1973," 4549.04(A) 342),2 second date 4549.04(D). A bill particulars filed prosecuting attorney specified 4 November, steal vehicle, such owner, 10. objected counts basis former jeopardy. 6 18, at pretrial hearing Common Pleas, understanding court would consider claim motion withdraw plea.3 submission motion, overruled Brown's double objections. six months but suspended sentence probation year. 7 affirmed. It misdemeanor felony theft: 8 "Every element also theft. 'The difference conviction part thief possession.' (T)he Id., 22. 9 Although analysis led agree "for purposes prosecutions involve offense," id., 23,4 nonetheless permissible: 10 "The based separate acts appellant, occurred 8th. Since appellant has not shown transaction, barred clause." Ibid. 11 Supreme denied leave appeal. 12 We granted certiorari claim, 429 893, 253, 50 176 (1976), we now reverse. II 13 applicable Fourteenth, provides no person shall "be subject offence put life limb." long been understood need identical either constituent elements actual order constitutional prohibition. Bishop, New Criminal Law 1051 (8th ed. 1892); Comment, Twice Jeopardy, 75 Yale L.J. 262, 268-269 (1965). principal joyriding, "same offence" Clause. 14 Because designed originally embody protection common-law pleas jeopardy, see Wilson, 420 332, 339-340, 95 1013, 1019-1020, 43 232 (1975), guarantee serves principally as restraint courts prosecutors. legislature remains free define fix punishments; once acted may impose more than prosecutors ordinarily attempt secure trial.5 15 "protects after acquittal. protects conviction. And multiple punishments offense." North Carolina Pearce, 395 711, 717, 89 2072, 2076, 23 656 (1969) (footnotes omitted). Where consecutive sentences imposed single criminal trial, role limited assuring exceed its legislative authorization imposing See Gore 357 386, 78 1280, 1405 (1958); Bell 349 81, 620, 99 905 (1955); Ex parte Lange, 18 Wall. 163, 21 872 (1874). stake, "a policy finality defendant's benefit." Jorn, 400 470, 479, 91 547, 554, 27 543 (1971) (plurality opinion). That accused attempts relitigate facts underlying prior acquittal, Ashe Swenson, 397 436, 90 1189, 25 469 (1970); cf. Martin Linen Supply Co., 430 564, 1349, 51 642 (1977), additional sentence, Green 355 184, 187-188, 221, 223, 199 (1957); supra. 16 established determining sufficiently distinguishable permit imposition stated 306 (1932): 17 rule where not. " This emphasizes crimes. "If not, satisfied, notwithstanding substantial overlap offered establish Iannelli 770, 785 n. 17, 1284, 1294 616 (1975). 19 If barring they necessarily will prosecutions. re Nielsen, 131 176, 672, 675-676, 33 118 (1889); Gavieres 220 338, 31 421, 55 489 (1911). judge forbidden end proceeding, prosecutor strive result proceedings. Unless "each statute Morey Commonwealth, 108 Mass. 433, 434 (1871), prohibits well punishment.6 20 mindful "have final authority interpret State's legislation." Garner Louisiana, 368 157, 169, 82 248, 254, 207 (1961). Here authoritatively defined crimes: Joyriding consists consent, possession. who prove requisite theft; well. Applying theft, court, 23. For clearly (statute) not." U.S., S.Ct., 182. As invariably true offense, beyond required therefore definition "same" any it. 22 conclusion merely restates what Court's least since Nielsen decided 1889. endorsed "where tried various incidents it, time those being 188, 676. 24 formulation precedes lesser, makes clear sequence immaterial. Thus, treated just application unless 190, 676, citing supra, Mass., 434. another rule, cited, 677, approval decision State Cooper, N.J.L. 361 (1833), Jersey arson subsequent felony-murder death man killed fire. Cf. Waller Florida, 387, 390, 1184, 1186, 435 (1970). Whatever be, offense.7 III After correctly holding nevertheless joyride. hold view. fragile can avoid limitations simple expedient dividing into series temporal spatial units. Braverman 317 49, 52, 63 99, 101, 87 (1942). statutes, written construed case, make operation authorities have perspectives law.8 Accordingly, 26 BRENNAN, whom MARSHALL joins, concurring. 28 I join opinion, event reverse ground, addressed Court, prosecute proceeding. adhere view except extremely circumstances present here, "all defendant grow out act, occurrence, episode, transaction." 453-454, 1199, (1970) (Brennan, J., concurring). Thompson Oklahoma, 1053, 768, 770 (1977) dissenting denial certiorari), cases collected therein. my suggestion, ante, 169 Legislature might operated affect applicability single-transaction test. Though some divide continuing course conduct discrete offenses, all growing constituting "single transaction" must 29 BLACKMUN, THE CHIEF JUSTICE REHNQUIST join, dissenting. reverses judgment wish slip advantage opportunity pronounce acceptable hitherto unenunciated (at level) law. dissent because, view, deserve treatment. I, course, quarrel general analysis. Jeffers 137, 2207, 168. am unable ignore easily does, however, specific finding issue here were committed, respectively, 1973. 32 Petitioner He subsequently possible, point so closely connected require treating them surely respect simultaneous unlawful operation. Furthermore, matter construction, allowable unit rather segments course. See, e. g., Universal C. I. T. Credit Corp., 344 218, 73 227, 260 (1952). feel neither these approaches justifies case. elapsed convictions. During moved Wickliffe. strains credulity believe every minute nine days. come when stopped car. When again later community, find, consistently justify prosecution. Only if correct. requirement should inferred, construe Ohio's did. 34 fear, gives undeserved emphasis, 163-164, Appeals' passing observation preliminary statement, indicating same. But then went flatly simultaneity here. seems me, precisely professes say do. 35 willingly circumvent authoritative affirm Appeals. Section provided time: "No operate, keep owner." punishable misdemeanor. 4549.04 repealed effective 1, 1974. provided: vehicle." felony. count nol prossed. recognized, viewed sovereign concerned questions arise retried mistrial, (1971), dismissal information, Jenkins, 358, 1006, 250 reversed appeal, Ball, 163 662, 1192, 41 300 (1896). Nor permissibility related opposes consolidated standard impermissibly Even con- secutive sentences, relitigation factual issues already resolved first. Thus (1970), acquittal robbing several participants poker game robbery, principles collateral estoppel embodied victims. (1889), Mormon cohabiting wives over 21/2-year period adultery period. cases, strict permitted Ashe, convictions robbery victim individual robbed. Ebeling Morgan, 237 625, 710, 59 1151 (1915). sexual intercourse woman while married another; cohabitation lived time. Nonetheless, protecting having 'run gantlet' time." 446, 1195, quoting 225, (1957). conclude today Blockburger, decide repetition otherwise entitle Nielsen. An exception exist proceed serious outset necessary sustain discovered despite exercise due diligence. Diaz 223 442, 448-449, 250, 251, 56 500 (1912); 453 7, 1199 302, 181. sustaining effect. courts' retroactively "an unforeseeable judicial enlargement statute" violate process. Bouie City Columbia, 378 347, 353, 84 1697, 1702, 894 (1964); Snow, 120 274, 283-286, 556, 560, 562, 658 (1887); Crepps Durden, Cowper 640 (K.B.1777).

Category: 0