Accomplices

Question 1

Types of Accomplices

Answer 1

1.Principal in the first degree main person
2. Principal in the second degree the person helping
3. Accessory before the fact providing assitance before the fact like loaning you a gun knowing youre going to kill
4. Accessory after the fact helping you after the crime is committed

Ways to be convicted
 Categories 1–3 all punished the same

 Category
Punished less severely

Question 2

Bailey (DC Cir 1969)

Answer 2

Charge: Robbery
 Principal in the first degree: unknown
 Is Bailey a principal in the seconddegree?
 Evidence:
 presence at scene of crime prior association with perpetrator
 subsequent flight

Question 3

Bailey—Rule of Accomplice liabilty

Answer 3

In order to aid or abet another, the Δmust:
 knowingly associate himself with the venture
 show that he wishes to bring about thecriminal act through his participation
 seek, by his action, to make it succeed
 Why does the evidence here fall short ofmeeting this definition?

Question 4

Beeman Cal 1984

Answer 4

Charges:
robbery, burglary, falseimprisonment, telephone destruction
 Was Beeman an accessory before thefact?
 Acts taken by Beeman:
 first to bring up rich relative
 drew floor plan
 present at discussion of the plans
 lent clothes for disguise

Question 5

Beemna required intent

Answer 5

Acts alone not enough, the Δ must actwith
: knowledge of the unlawful purpose of perp
 the intent or purpose of committing,encouraging, or facilitating the commissionof the offense and
 by act or advice aids, promotes, encouragesor instigates, the commission of the crime

Question 6

Fountain 7th cir 1985

Answer 6

Why relax the intent requirement “whenthe crime is particularly grave”?
 Rule: “aiding and abetting murder isestablished by proof beyond reasonabledoubt that the supplier of the murderweapon knew the purpose for which itwould be used.”
 Thus, it’s not a defense that you hopedhe wouldn’t kill with the knife you gavehim

Question 7

Kessler III. 1974

Answer 7

Charges: burglary & 2 attemptedmurders
 Evidence:
 Kessler helped plan the burglary and waitedin the car.
 He did not know a gun would be acquiredand used against people
 Does Kessler’s liability extend to crimeshe never actually contemplated?

Question 8

Unintentional

Answer 8

McVay (R.I. 1926)

 One can aid in a negligent or reckless act bywhich the principal then caused the harm.

 Marshall (Mich. 1961)

 But, that principle would be extended too farif Marshall was held liable for Coldiron’sactions. Why?