Criminal Law - Crimes Against Property

Question 1

Incohates

Answer 1

• Solicitation
• Conspiracy
• Attempt

Question 2

Solicitation

Answer 2

Specific Intent. D entices, encourages, orders or
requests another to commit a crime. The crime
is complete at this point. Merges into the target offense. No agreement necessary. No defenses at common law. No defense that the person solicited is an undercover agent and under no circumstances would have committed the crime solicited.

Question 3

Attempt

Answer 3

Specific Intent. Elements:
1) Intent to commit a crime
2) a “substantial” step in furtherance that goes
beyond mere preparation
Merges into the completed offense.
Defenses: Legal impossibility − yes. Factual impossibility − no.

Question 4

Common Law Conspiracy

Answer 4

Specific Intent. Elements (common law):
1) Agreement between 2 or more persons
2) Intent to achieve same criminal objective
• Conspiracy does NOT merge
• Defenses
• Withdrawal is no defense at common law
• MPC contra if defendant “thwarts the
success”

Question 5

MPC Conspiracy

Answer 5

Agreement b/w “2 or more” persons is not required. Only agreement by a single actor agreeing with another is needed. A mere tacit understanding will suffice, and there need not be any written statement or even a speaking of words that expressly communicates agreement. “Guilt as a conspirator is measured by the situation as the actor views it; he must have the purpose of promoting or facilitating a criminal offense, and with that purpose must agree (or believe that he is agreeing) with another that they will engage in the criminal offense or in solicitation to commit it.”

Question 6

Pinkerton Rule

Answer 6

All co-conspirators are liable for all crimes committed by any conspirator in furtherance of the original agreement.