# Byrd v. United States

> District of Columbia Court of Appeals · February 3, 1986 · 500 A.2d 1376

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9639145

## Case

- **Full name:** Samuel L. BYRD, Jr., Appellant, v. UNITED STATES, Appellee
- **Court:** District of Columbia Court of Appeals
- **Decided:** February 3, 1986
- **Citations:** 500 A.2d 1376
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Newman
- **Judges:** Newman, Belson
- **Cited by:** 27 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- **Red flag:** Vacated by Towles v. United States, 1986 D.C. App. LEXIS 520 (1986).
- Negative treatments: 2
- Distinguished by: 0
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9639145

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- holding “we would take the view that we should decline to mandate which of appellant’s first-degree murder convictions must be vacated, but leave it to the trial court on remand to cure the multiple punishment problem, so that it may implement its original sentencing plan”
- explaining that “[f]irst-degree premeditated murder and first-degree felony murder are but separate clauses in one statutory provision—D.C. Code § 22-2401 (1981)—murder in the first degree”
- explaining that the Blockburger test is used only if the court has determined the two crimes are statutorily distinct

## Opinion text

NEWMAN, Associate Judge,
concurring:
I join the opinion of Judge Belson in all respects save one, and write separately only to highlight an additional area of concern which I have. I have serious doubt as to whether second-degree murder is a lesser included offense of felony murder. See Towles v. United States, 496 A.2d 560 , slip op. at 7, n. 6 (D.C. July 25, 1985) (vacated by en banc order dated October 1, 1985 when the court decided to rehear en banc). I have the same “substantial doubt” expressed by Judge Ferren in his dissent on this issue in Towles .

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9639145. Public record. Not legal advice.