The following excerpt is from U.S. v. Wallstrum, 867 F.2d 614 (9th Cir. 1989):
We have adopted a "factor analysis" to determine whether two conspiracy counts charge the same offense and thereby place a defendant in double jeopardy. United States v. Bendis, 681 F.2d 561, 565 (9th Cir.1981), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 973 (1982)). Using this analysis we compare "the differences in the periods of time covered by the alleged conspiracies, the places where the conspiracies were alleged to occur, the persons charged as co-conspirators, the overt acts alleged to have been committed, and the statutes alleged to have been violated." Id. (quoting United States v. Mayo, 646 F.2d 369, 372 (9th Cir.) (per curiam), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 1127 (1981)).
The first factor we consider is time. In Florida, the indictment charged a conspiracy beginning in November 1984 and continuing until January of 1985. The California indictment charges a conspiracy beginning in 1974 and continuing to about April 1986. The Florida time span is entirely included within the California time span. The Florida conspiracy, however, began ten years after the California conspiracy was underway. The fact that the two conspiracies overlap in time does not prove that there was only one conspiracy. See United States v. Thomas, 759 F.2d 659, 667 (8th Cir.1985).
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.