Inchoate Offenses

Question 1

Attempt

Answer 1

an actor has the specific intent to commit a crime and an overt act in furtherance of that crime.

Question 2

Attempt- Substantial Step test (majority)

Answer 2

offender must commit an act that is a substantial step in a course of conduct planned to culminate in the commission of the crime.
- Mere preparation is insufficient.
->acquiring a weapon or materials to effectuate the crime.
-> unlawful entry into the place where the crime is intended to occur
->enticing the victim to go to the place where the crime is intended to occur

Question 3

Attempt- Close Proximity Test(minority)

Answer 3

Offender’s act must bring him dangerously close to completing the crime
-volitional act in the presence of an intended victim(ex: pointing gun at victim)

Question 4

Attempt- Merger Doctrine

Answer 4

Attempt crimes merge into the completed crime, so long as the crime is completed.
- cannot be charged with murder AND attempted murder.

Question 5

Attempt- special defenses (impossibility)

Answer 5

Factual impossibility is not a defense where the crime is incapable of being completed due to circumstances unknown to the defendant.
(for ex: stabbing an already dead person)

Question 6

Attempt- special defenses (abandonment)

Answer 6

Once a defendant has taken a substantial step toward the commission of a crime, with the specific intent that it occurs, the crime of attempt is completed.
-there can be no abandonment or withdrawal from an attempt after the substantial step.
Minority view: voluntary abandonment may be a defense so long as it is done for reasons other than to avoid detection.

Question 7

Conspiracy

Answer 7

An agreement between two or more persons to commit a crime with the specific intent that the crime be completed.
-mental state of the completed crime does not matter
-cannot have the specific intent to do something unintentional
-cannot conspire the crime of involuntary manslaughter
-CAN conspire strict liability offenses

Question 8

Conspiracy - Federal + MPC jurisdictions (overt act)

Answer 8

any co-conspirator, with or without the knowledge of the other co-conspirator, commits an act that is a substantial step in a course of conduct planned to culminate in the commission of the crime
-Mere preparation is insufficient

Question 9

Conspiracy- Scope

Answer 9

A defendant may be liable for the underlying crimes of his co-conspirators if
- the crime was committed in furtherance of conspiracy
-a natural and probable consequence of the conspiracy

Question 10

Conspiracy: Co-conspirators

Answer 10

Strictly construed, two or more individuals forming the agreement.
MPB: unilateral conspiracies may exist in situations for a co-conspirator who actually agrees with one who feigns agreement or where the co-conspirator has been acquitted.

Question 11

Protected Party Conspirators

Answer 11

There can be no conspiracy between a targeted defendant where his only co-conspirator is the protected party of criminal conduct.

Question 12

Prosecution of Co-conspirator

Answer 12

A conspirator cannot be convicted if all his other co-conspirators are acquitted on the merits at trial.

Question 13

Conspiracy- impossibility defense

Answer 13

factual impossibility is not a defense where the crime is incapable of being competed due to circumstances unknown to the conspirators.
-> legal impossibility of a crime is a valid defense, agreed to conduct would NOT be illegal.

Question 14

Conspiracy- withdrawal

Answer 14

Common law: withdrawal is NOT a defense.
-Crime is completed upon agreement
-MPC: withdrawal is a defense so long as it occurs before the overt act has been committed and the withdrawing conspirator communicates notice of his intent to withdraw to other co-conspirators OR to police.

Question 15

Solicitation

Answer 15

Enticing, encouraging, or advising another person to commit a crime, with the specific intent that the person commit a crime.
-Special defenses: protected party(defense to the solicitor)