Cited by

¶18 “An offense is ‘lesser included’ when the ‘greater offense cannot be committed without necessarily committing the lesser offense.’” ¶ 10 (2020) (citation omitted).

¶ 7 (2020) (observing that double jeopardy protections prohibit the State from trying or punishing a defendant more than once for the same offense); U.S. Const. amend.

at ¶ 6, even if the defendant receives concurrent sentences, ¶ 1 n.1 (2020).

¶ 83 (2015) (multiplicity); ¶ 7 (2020) (double jeopardy).

When one act violates two statutes, the Blockburger test is “the only permissible interpretation of the double jeopardy clause.” ¶ 9 (2020) (citation and quotation marks omitted).

¶16 "The Double Jeopardy Clauses in both the United States and Arizona Constitutions protect a defendant 'against a second prosecution for the same offense after acquittal' and 'against a second prosecution for the same offense after conviction.'" ¶ 7 (2020) (quoting Ohio v. Johnson, 467 U.S. 493, 498 (1984)).

the crime charged without having committed the lesser one.’” Lua, 237 Ariz. at 303 ¶ 7 (); –30 ¶ 6 (App. 2014) (“[T]he greater offense must require each element of the lesser offense plus one or more additional elements not required by the lesser offense.”)

(recognizing the defense strategy 2 The State argues the superior court did not err because, –16, ¶¶ 9–11 (2020), contributing to the delinquency of a child should no longer be considered a lesser-included offense of child molestation.

An offense is a lesser included offense when the “greater offense cannot be committed without necessarily committing the lesser offense.” ¶ 10 (2020) ( ¶ 14 (2006)).

–17, ¶¶ 12–14 (2020) (discussing theft under A.R.S.

See, ¶ 1 n.2 (2020) (“The analysis under both the federal and state constitutions is the same because the language is virtually identical .