Legal Definitions - merger of offenses

Merger of offenses is a legal principle in criminal law that prevents a person from being convicted or punished for two separate crimes when one of those crimes is considered to be a part of, or subsumed by, the other. This often occurs when one crime is a necessary step to commit another, or when a lesser crime is an essential component of a greater crime. The purpose of this doctrine is to prevent double jeopardy – that is, punishing someone multiple times for what is essentially the same criminal act or conduct.

• Example 1: Lesser Included Offense

  Imagine a situation where an individual physically attacks another person, causing them injury. They are charged with both "assault" (threatening or attempting to cause harm) and "battery" (unlawful physical contact causing harm).

  How it illustrates merger: In many legal systems, battery is considered a "greater" offense that inherently includes all the elements of assault. If the individual is convicted of battery, the assault charge would typically "merge" into the battery charge. This means they would only be convicted and sentenced for the battery, as the assault was an integral part of the same act that constituted the battery. The law prevents punishing someone twice for what is essentially one continuous act of aggression.

• Example 2: Inchoate Offense into Completed Offense

  Consider a scenario where a group of individuals plans and agrees to rob a jewelry store (this constitutes "conspiracy to commit robbery"). They then proceed to successfully carry out the robbery, stealing valuable items.

  How it illustrates merger: If the group is charged with both "conspiracy to commit robbery" and the completed crime of "robbery," the conspiracy charge would typically merge into the completed robbery charge for sentencing purposes. The law recognizes that the conspiracy was the preparatory step to the completed crime. Once the main crime is achieved, the preparatory crime often merges to avoid imposing separate punishments for the planning and the execution of the same criminal objective.

• Example 3: Single Act, Multiple Charges

  Suppose a driver, while under the influence of alcohol, causes a severe accident that results in the death of another person. The driver is charged with both "DUI causing death" and "vehicular homicide."

  How it illustrates merger: Depending on the specific laws of the jurisdiction, these two charges might be considered to describe the same criminal act – causing a death while driving under the influence. If the elements of one offense are entirely subsumed by the other, or if both charges punish the exact same harm arising from the same incident, a court might rule that they "merge." This would mean the defendant would only be convicted and sentenced for one of the charges, even though both accurately describe aspects of their conduct, to prevent multiple punishments for the single fatal incident.