The following excerpt is from U.S. v. Zvi, 168 F.3d 49 (2nd Cir. 1999):
The government argues that the two offenses here are sufficiently distinguishable to satisfy the Blockburger test (annunciated in Blockburger v. United States, 284 U.S. 299, 304, 52 S.Ct. 180, 76 L.Ed. 306 (1932)) because the domestic money laundering count required proof that the defendants engaged in a "financial transaction" involving the illegal proceeds, whereas the international money laundering count required proof that defendants "transport[ed], transmit[ted], or transfer[red]" the illegal proceeds outside of or into the country.
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.