52 S.Ct. 180, 182, 76 L.Ed. 306 (1932), the charged murder offense and the lesser-included charged conspiracy offense are not distinct offenses for double jeopardy purposes. Accordingly, a consecutive sentences are for the same or a lesser-included offense is “ ‘whether each [charged offense] requires proof of a fact which the other does not.’ ” Coleman, 261 Va. at 200, 539 S.E.2d at 734 (emphasis added) (alteration in original) (quoting Blockburger, 284 U.S. at 304, 52 S.Ct. at 182); see Brown, 432 U.S. at 166, 97 S.Ct. at 2225 (“The established test for determining whether two offenses are sufficiently distinguishable to permit the imposition of cumulative punishment was stated in Blockburger----”); cf. Taylor v. Commonwealth, 11 Va.App. 649, 652-53, 400 S.E.2d 794, 795-96 (1991) (<HOLDING>). “ ‘This test emphasizes the elements of the
holding that the determination whether a crime is a necessarily included lesser offense of another crime is made by examining the elements of the crimes that must be proved in order to sustain a conviction holding it is fundamental error to convict a defendant of crime not charged and which is not a lesser included offense of the charged crime holding that an offense is factually lesser included if the charging instrument alleges that the means used to commit the crime charged include all of the elements of the alleged lesser included offense holding that a lesser crime cannot be a lesser included offense of a greater crime if the lesser crime contains an essential element not included in the greater crime holding that the crime of rape is a lesser included offense of the crime of felony murder in the perpetration of rape and that since the latter crime included all of the elements of the former consecutive sentences were therefore improper