With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". legislative intent is the so-called ‘same elements' test of Blockburger,” but "even if a straightforward application of the Blockburger test would suggest that two offenses are not the ‘same’ for double jeopardy purposes,” the offenses are nevertheless considered the same, “if other indicia manifest a legislative intent that an accused not be punished for both offenses”) (citing Ex parte Ervin v. State, 991 S.W.2d 804 (Tex.Crim.App.1999)); See also Ervin, 991 S.W.2d at 804 ("[T]he Blockburger test cannot authorize two punishments where the legislature clearly intended only one.”); 7 . See Bigon, 252 S.W.3d at 372 (under an Ervin analysis, looking at charging instrument allegations to determine the underlying felony in felony murder prosecution); see also Hall, 225 S.W.3d at 533 n. 39 (<HOLDING>); Ervin, 991 S.W.2d at 807 (recognizing "the

A: holding that parties are bound by admissions in pleadings
B: holding that a trial court entered judgment on the pleadings where the decision did not depend on any document outside the pleadings
C: recognizing that pleadings in the underlying case are subject to judicial notice by an appellate court
D: recognizing that hunter involved a cognate pleadings analysis
D.