accomplice liability and Inchoate offenses

Question 1

who is an accomplice (3 words)

Answer 1

one who

1) aids
2) advises (counsels) or
3) encourages the principal in the commission of the crime charged

Question 2

do accomplices need to have intent of the crime to be committed

Answer 2

YES

Question 3

what are accomplices liable for?

Answer 3

1) crime itself and

2) all other foreseeable crimes

Question 4

are accomplices reliable for foreseeable crimes by the principal?

Answer 4

YES

Question 5

what are the 3 ways an accomplice can withdraw

Answer 5

1) repudiate encouragement
2) neutralize the assistance (such as getting materials back)
3) contact the police

Question 6

what are the 3 inchoate offenses

Answer 6

1) solicitation
2) Conspiracy
3) attempt

Question 7

what is the rule for solicitation

Answer 7

solicitation is asking someone to commit the crime. Ends when you ask them to commit the crime

Question 8

when is a person guilty of solicitation?

Answer 8

ends once the D asks the person to commit the crime.

Question 9

under CL did the person have to agree to commit the crime?

Answer 9

NO. not necessary under CL that person solicited agreed to commit the crime.

Question 10

what happens when the person you asked to commit the crime under solicitation, commits the crime.

Answer 10

then no longer solicitation but CONSPIRACY

Question 11

is factual impossibility a defense under solicitation?

Answer 11

NO

Question 12

what is conspiracy

Answer 12

1) an agreement with
2) an intent to agree and
3) an intent to pursue an UNLAWFUL OBJECTIVE

Question 13

what is the only inchoate offense that does not merge if underlying crime is committed

Answer 13

CONSPIRACY. can be charged both conspiracy and underlying crime

Question 14

when is a co-conspirator liable for other others?

Answer 14

each conspirator is liable for ALL crimes of co-conspirator if those crimes were committed

1) in FURTHERANCE of conspiracy and
2) FORESEEABLE

Question 15

for conspiracy does the agreement need to be explicit?

Answer 15

No. Intent can be inferred from conduct

Question 16

what are the 2 approach for conspiracy

Answer 16

1) bilateral approach

2) unilateral approach

Question 17

which approach for conspiracy does CL follow?

Answer 17

Bilateral approach

Question 18

what is bilateral approach for conspiracy

Answer 18

2 GUILTY PARTIES

- If 1 person is merely feigning agreement, the other person cannot be found guilty of conspiracy

Question 19

what happens under bilateral approach for conspiracy if all other co-conspirators are acquitted?

Answer 19

acquittal of ALL persons with whom D is alleged to have conspired PRECLUDES CONVICTION of the remaining D

Question 20

what is the unilateral approach for conspiracy

Answer 20

only need ONE person to have a genuine criminal intent (can have undercover cops)

Question 21

what is the overt act requirement for conspiracy under the majority rule (Modern Law)

Answer 21

there must be an agreement AND

2) an overt act in furtherance of conspiracy

Question 22

what is the overt act requirement for conspiracy in CL which is the minority view

Answer 22

overt act can be the agreement itself.

Question 23

under the majority view for overt act for conspiracy what constitutes overt act

Answer 23

any little act. Even MERE PREPARATION

Question 24

Does mere preparation constitute conspiracy under the modern law for overt act

Answer 24

yes

Question 25

is factual impossibility a defense to conspiracy?

Answer 25

NO

Question 26

can withdraw, even if adequate relieve the D from liability of conspiracy itself?

Answer 26

NOOOO.

the D can withdraw from liability of subsequent crimes though, but not own conspiracy

Question 27

what is the rule for attempt?

Answer 27

need

1) specific intent to commit the crime and
2) OVERT ACT in furtherance of the crime

Question 28

is mere preparation of the crime enough for an overt act in attempt

Answer 28

NO. need a substantial step in furtherance of the crime

Question 29

what is required for an overt act in attempt?

Answer 29

SUBSTANTIAL STEP in furtherance of the crime

Question 30

under the CL and majority once D has taken a substantial step toward committing a crime can they abandon the crime for attempt?

Answer 30

NEVER. once D has taken a substantial step towards the crime can never abandon

Question 31

what steps are required for defense of abandonment under attempt

Answer 31

1) fully voluntary and a
2) COMPLETE renunciation of criminal purpose
(not enough to just say ill do it later)

Question 32

Is factual impossibility a defense to attempt?

Answer 32

NO

Question 33

are factual impossibility defenses allowed under the inchoate defenses?

Answer 33

NO

Question 34

is legal impossbility allowed for defense of attempt?

Answer 34

Yes

Question 35

what is the difference b/w legal impossibility and factual impossibility

Answer 35

legal impossibility: w/e trying to do was not a crime
factual impossibility: didn’t have the facts to commit the crime
(ex: rob a bank but it has no money)

Question 36

does doctrine of transferred intent apply to ATTEMPT

Answer 36

NO, does not apply to an attempt

Question 37

what if someone is charged of attempted murder what must prove

Answer 37

specific intent to kill that actual person, does not apply to doctrine of transferred intent.

Question 38

mens rea requirement for accomplice

Answer 38

• aid, counsel or encouragement was given with
  1) INTENT to assist the principal AND
  2) INTENT that the principal commit the crime

Question 39

what is required for criminal liability under accomplice theory

Answer 39

must be established that the D helped with the commission of the crime with the INTENT to assist the P and the INTENT that the P commit the crime.

• A mental state of recklessness is not sufficient to justify a conviction as accomplice, regardless of the mental state required for the principal crime