Complicity & Conspiracy Terms Flashcards
Old v. New accomplice definitions
- eliminated distinction between principals and accessories before the fact
- Now we say person is legal accountable for conduct of another when he’s an accomplish
- modern codes ID if nonconviction of principal prevents conviction of accomplice
MPC v. Rosemond: actus reus & mens rea
Actus reus (similar)
- Rosemond: affirmative act in furtherance, no matter how slight
- MPC: aid or attempt to aid planning or commuting
Mens rea (different)
- Rosemond: “full knowledge”
- MPC: purpose of promoting or facilitating target crime
Natural & Probable Consequences Doctrine
Rosemond: exception to the general rule when another crime is the natural improbable consequence of the crime D intended to abet
- liability extended to reach actual, rather than plan crime
- was the crime within the “zone of risk” of danger created? / foreseeable?
- General trend away from this
- many jurisdictions reject this
- Peoni: d sold counterfeit bills to second person, who resold. D liable for second persons but not 3d even though 3d could have been a probable Consequence
Conspiracy
1: figure out what agreement is. Need actus reus and mens rea
Both an inchoate crime (conspiring to do something that was incomplete) and a theory of liability (can get everyone on the hook: vicarious liability)
- agreement ; mere association isn’t enough (must be intentional)
Conspiracy v. Complicity
- conspiring does not necessarily make you an accomplice
- conspiracy: agreement
- accomplice: furthers intent
Overt Acts
At CL, conspiracy is made as soon as there’s agreement
MPC, gov’t must prove any co-conspirator engaged in overt act in pursuance of conspiracy
- any prep story step (doesn’t have to be significant)
- tangible evidence (evidentiary requirement)
Conspiracy defenses
- Withdrawing = cut off liability by closing to law-enforcement or communicating withdrawal.
- Renunciation
- CL not a defense
- MPC = thwarts successive conspiracy; complete and voluntary pronunciation of criminal purpose
One conspiracy or many?
If 1 —> Pinkerton
If many —> do not need to know everything, but general awareness. Courts look at many things (concert of behavior, overt acts, overlap in personnel, time period, operation)
Shape of conspiracy
Wheel = ringleader in middle communicating w spokes—need to connect (rim)
Chain = success of each link depends on success of others and they have reason to know that
Difficulty in proving the agreement and need to infer from substantial actions
