Court Opinion

ID: 9769801
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-29 15:02:28.612733+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:31:08.180052
License: Public Domain

MANSFIELD, Judge,
concurring.
I join the opinion of the Court. The situation presented here is analagous to a well-established practice under federal law: prosecution of an individual for bank robbery followed by prosecution of the same individual for tax evasion for failing to report (and pay taxes on) the proceeds of the bank robbery as taxable income under the Internal Revenue Code. Clearly, these are two separate and distinct offenses, albeit arising from the same criminal transaction, with separate and distinct elements. Similarly, the double jeopardy clause of the Fifth Amendment is not implicated because possession of marihuana and failure to pay tax on the same marihuana are not the “same offenses.” See Blockburger v. United States, 284 U.S. 299, *27352 S.Ct. 180, 76 L.Ed. 306 (1932); United States v. Woodward, 469 U.S. 105, 105 S.Ct. 611, 83 L.Ed.2d 518 (1985) (Making a false statement to a customs officer about the amount of currency being carried and willfully failing to report carrying in excess of $5,000 are not the same crime under Block-burger as Congress intended these to be separate offenses and the applicable statutes address “separate evils”).