The doctrine of merger applies in a criminal setting where the defendant committed two or more crimes in a single act but is only charged with one crime. Essentially, the multiple instances are “merged” by a judge or combined into a single charge.
The merger doctrine benefits criminal defendants by merging the related charges into one criminal conviction rather than a conviction for multiple counts or crimes.
Usually, the most serious offense is the last one standing rather than the minor offense. The defendant benefits from the doctrine by only being sentenced for one conviction rather than several, which means they will spend less time incarcerated or pay a smaller fine.
This also helps the defendant with regard to their record, for they will only have one conviction on the record rather than several.
Process/Steps: The process of invoking the merger doctrine usually involves a defense lawyer raising the issue prior to or during sentencing. This may be done by filing a motion to merge the charges or as an argument during a sentencing hearing.
The court will then consider whether the offenses are sufficiently related as well as whether the elements of the lesser offense are included in the greater offense. If the court agrees, the sentences for the lesser offense are merged into the sentence for the greater offense.
Evidence/Documents: The evidence used to support an argument for the merger doctrine usually focuses on demonstrating the close relationship between the offenses. This can include presenting evidence that the elements of the lesser offense are encompassed entirely within the greater offense.
In addition, evidence that shows that the offenses happened as part of a single, continuous act or transaction can be used to strengthen the argument for merger. The specific evidence and documents will depend on the facts of the case as well as the applicable laws of the jurisdiction.
What Is Double Jeopardy and How Does the Merger Doctrine Help Prevent It?
Double jeopardy is a constitutional protection under the 5th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution for those accused and later tried for a crime. If the jury has found them not guilty, or if the case has been dismissed once the jury has been constituted, the government may not try them again for the same act or set of acts.
The Constitution holds that a person may not be placed into jeopardy of life or limb more than once for a single crime. By merging the offenses substantially related to the final convicted offense, the state and federal prosecutors cannot charge the merged offenses even though there was no finding of not guilty (or any other finding) on the merged offenses.
Using again the situation of a charge for burglary being merged into the manslaughter charge, if the merger doctrine is in place, then the defendant can never be prosecuted for the burglary. By dropping the lesser offense, the defendant is not punished twice for the same act, which would violate the double jeopardy clause of the 5th Amendment.
What Crimes Qualify for Merging?
When speaking of the merger doctrine, there are differences across states and the federal legal system. However, generally, merger applies in two primary areas of criminal law, including lesser included offenses and attempted criminal offenses.
Lesser Included Offenses
When a defendant commits an act or series of acts that comprise one criminal offense, there may be more than one offense that applies to that act. Lesser included offenses are those crimes that have similar elements to the more serious crime the defendant is convicted of and, as a result, will be merged with the more serious offense for sentencing purposes.
Consider the following example: a defendant is found guilty of entering the victim’s property without permission, breaking their window, and climbing through it. Once inside, the defendant takes the victim’s television and computer before escaping the residence.
The most serious offense the defendant has committed is burglary, a felony. The lesser offenses, and the ones that will likely be merged with the burglary conviction, include:
Attempted Criminal Offenses
If a defendant does not complete a crime, they may still be charged with an attempt to commit it. For example, if the defendant tried to murder someone but the victim survived, the defendant cannot be charged with murder but can be charged with attempted murder, also a very serious offense.
If the murder was completed, the prosecution may want to charge the defendant with murder and attempted murder. This is done so that if the jury finds that the defendant was not culpable of murdering someone, the jury can still find the defendant liable by convicting them of the attempt to commit the murder.
There are many crimes in which only an attempt to commit the crime constitutes its own offense. However, if the defendant is found to have committed the completed crime, under the merger doctrine the attempted charge is merged with the completed offense under the merger doctrine.
Risks/Penalties: There are numerous potential risks an individual may face for violating criminal laws, no matter what level the offense that can impact their criminal record and nearly every aspect of their lives. Incarceration, criminal fines, and forfeiture of assets associated with the crime are common potential penalties.
If convicted of a crime, an individual may also face issues keeping their current job, getting a new job, and may lose a business license or not be able to obtain one in the future. With some offenses, an individual may lose certain civil rights, such as the right to possess a firearm or vote.
An individual may also face issues obtaining housing, such as rental housing, and government benefits and loans. Criminal convictions can also create immigration issues.
What Criminal Law Scenarios Do Not Allow Merging of Crimes or Sentences?
For criminal charges or convictions to be merged, the offenses must be closely related. There are some situations in which the crimes will not qualify for merging:
- The Two Crimes Have Different Elements: If one of the charged crimes has an element that is not part of the other crime, the two cannot be merged.
- Element means the pieces of the charge that the state has to prove.
- For example, to convict someone of murder, the state must prove at least two elements: that the defendant physically committed the murder (took actions that led to the death of the victim) and that the defendant intended to cause the victim’s death, or at least serious bodily injury.
- Different Evidence to Support One or More Elements: If the state intends to offer different evidence to support the conviction of the second crime, then the crimes cannot be merged.
- Crimes Were Not Completed at the Same Time: If a defendant stole a candy bar from Store A today and then returned to the store the next day and stole something else, that will result in two separate criminal charges that are not eligible for merging because they occurred at different times.
- Conspiracy Charges: Many serious criminal acts also have the added charge of conspiracy for the crime, and conspiracy does not merge with the underlying offense.
- For example, if a spouse conspires with their new lover and plans the murder of the victim’s spouse and then carries out the murder, they can be convicted for both the murder and the charge of conspiracy to commit murder.
- Those two charges cannot be merged.
What Is the Impact of Merging Criminal Offenses for the Defendant?
When the defendant’s crimes are merged, it tends to benefit the defendant in two ways:
- Fewer Charges Are Recorded on the Defendant’s Record: In the burglary example above, the defendant could be charged with burglary, trespass, destruction of property, and theft.
- However, if the defendant is convicted of burglary, then the remaining charges may be merged into the burglary conviction, thus showing only the conviction for burglary.
- Rather than four convictions on their record, they will only have one.
- Shorter Sentences or Lesser Penalties: If the defendant’s lesser charges are merged, as in the burglary example, they will only be subject to the maximum penalties for the burglary crime and none of the penalties for the other three.
- If the merger doctrine was not in place, the defendant could receive the following sentence:
- Six years in prison for the burglary
- Three years in prison for the larceny or theft charge
- One year in prison or jail plus a fine of $1000 for the destruction of property charge (the window)
- Six months in jail for the trespassing charge
Thus, the total number of years charged could be 6 + 3 + 1 plus six months and a fine of $1000, for 10 years and six months plus the fine. Because the lesser included offenses merge with the burglary, the defendant will only be sentenced to six years with no fine.
What Are Some Other Considerations Related To Merging Criminal Offenses?
Timelines: In general, arguments related to the merger doctrine should be raised prior to or during the sentencing phase of a criminal trial. There may be specific deadlines for filing sentencing-related motions.
Because of this, it is important to consult with a lawyer to understand the applicable rules in a particular jurisdiction. Failing to raise the issue in a timely manner may result in an individual’s waiver of their right to argue for a merger in their criminal sentencing.
Costs/Fees: The costs that are associated with arguing for the merger doctrine are primarily related to having legal representation. Attorneys’s fees may vary depending on the complexity of the case, the lawyer’s experience, as well as the jurisdiction.
There can also be court filing fees associated with filing motions. However, these are usually standard fees that are not specifically tied to arguing the merger doctrine.
State Variations: The application of the merger doctrine may vary significantly between the states and the federal system. There are some states that may have specific case law or statutes that define the scope of the doctrine, while other states rely on common law principles.
These variations may affect the offenses that are eligible for merger as well as the specific criteria that must be met. Consulting with a lawyer who is familiar with the laws in the relevant jurisdiction is essential for understanding how the merger doctrine will apply in a particular case.
The Importance of Hiring a Lawyer: Trying to navigate the merger doctrine without having legal representation can be risky because of the complexities of criminal laws and procedures. A layperson without legal experience may not fully understand the nuances of the doctrine, the applicable laws in their jurisdiction, or how they can best present their case in court.
These issues can result in missed opportunities to argue for merger, which can result in a harsher sentence. An attorney can provide guidance and advocacy to make sure their client gets the best possible outcome.
Do I Need a Criminal Lawyer To Help Me with the Merging of Criminal Offenses?
If you are facing criminal charges, you should consult a criminal defense lawyer immediately if you are facing criminal charges. A lawyer can explain your rights, investigate whether you have any defenses to the crimes charged, and represent you in court.
