inchoate crimes

Question 1

inchoate crimes

Answer 1

incomplete crimes. ALL require specific intent to commit the target offense

Question 2

solicitation

Answer 2

the crime of trying to get someone else to commit your crime
1. enticing, advising, inciting, urging, or encouraging another
2. to commit a crime
3. with the intent that the other person commits the crime

Question 3

when is solicitation complete?

Answer 3

once the solicitation is communicated

Question 4

when solicitation merges into target offense

Answer 4

There is no requirement that the solicitee commit the target offense

*BUT if they do (or attempt to) solicitation merges into that offense and the solicitor will be charged as an accomplice to the target offense, not with solicitation.

Question 5

attempt

Answer 5

“almost” committing a crime
1. the specific intent to bring about a criminal result; and
2. a significant overt act in furtherance of that intent that proves that D went past the point of preparation and began perpetration

Question 6

attempt and proximity test

Answer 6

Ask how close in time and physical distance the defendant was to the time and place the target offense was to be committed.

Question 7

attempt and equivocality test

Answer 7

The defendant’s conduct unequivocally indicates that he was going to complete the target offense.

Question 8

determining attempt at common law

Answer 8

The defendant is required to perform the last act necessary to achieve the intended result.

Question 9

determining attempt MPC

Answer 9

An act is sufficient as long as it is a “substantial step” toward commission that indicates a purpose to complete the offense.

Question 10

defenses to attempt

Answer 10

1. abandonment
2. legal impossibility
3. factual impossibility

Question 11

abandonment

Answer 11

CL: there is no defense once the attempt is complete (moved from preparation to perpetration)

MPC: a voluntary and complete abandonment is a defense.

Question 12

legal impossibility

Answer 12

D is not guilty if they thought they were committing a crime, but its not actually a crime

Question 13

factual impossibility

Answer 13

if D would have committed the crime had the facts been as they believed them to be, the D is guilty of attempt, even if it was factually impossible to complete the crime

(is D believes his gun has bullets, and intentionally shoots to kill V, but gun has no bullets, still attempted murder)

Question 14

conspiracy

Answer 14

1. an intentional agreement between two or more persons
2. to commit a crime together; and
3. an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy

-must have specific intent to commit an unlawful act

Question 15

overt act requirements

Answer 15

CL: conspiracy formed as soon as there is an agreement between two or more people for an unlawful purpose.

Modern Majority: requires the overt act in furtherance. Beginning preparation is sufficient.

Question 16

Pinkerton Doctrine

Answer 16

each co-conspirator is liable for the crime of all other co-conspirators where the crimes were both:
1. a foreseeable outgrowth of the conspiracy, and
2. committed in furtherance of a conspiratorial goal

Question 17

“chain” conspiracies

Answer 17

conspiracies with a series of events that are dependent on each other, each of which furthers the object of the conspiracy
-all are responsible for the crimes of each other

Question 18

“wheel and spoke” conspiracies

Answer 18

when one person (the hub) enters into agreements with individuals (spokes). the individuals and not connected to each other, just connected to the hub. they are not responsible for each other.

Question 19

acquittal of co-conspirator

Answer 19

CL: if there are only two conspirators, acquittal of one requires acquittal of the other.

MPC: permits conviction of a single party when the other conspirator is acquitted or lied about the agreement (unilateral conspiracy)

Question 20

Wharton’s Rule

Answer 20

if the target offense requires two or more people, then a conspiracy charge cannot be brought
(for example dueling)

Question 21

exception to whatron’s rule

Answer 21

if the agreement involves an additional person that is not essential to the definition of the crime, conspiracy can be charged

Question 22

can conspiracy merge with the underlying offense?

Answer 22

no. you get charged with both- conspiracy, and the crime

Question 23

withdrawal from conspiracy

Answer 23

(CL and MPC)
compelte and voluntary withdrawal severs liability for FUTURE crimes, but is no defense to the conspiracy itself.
*requires notice to all conspirators

Question 24

renunciation from conspiracy

Answer 24

(MPC only) withdrawal and an affirmative act to thwart the conspiracy can eliminate responsibility for the conspiracy itself.