Inchoate Offenses / Accomplice Liability Flashcards
What are inchoate offenses?
“Inchoate” offenses allow punishment of an actor even though he has not consummated the crime that is the object of his efforts
What was the rule from People v. Gentry? (attempts)
A conviction of attempt murder requires a specific intent to kill. Attempt is a specific intent crime in the common law.
What was the rule from Commonwealth v. Peaslee? (attempts)
To be found guilty of attempt, a defendant must have a present intent to commit the crime in the near future and must have the intent at a time and place where he is able to carry it out.
What is the rule from People v. Rizzo? (attempts)
A defendant may not be convicted of an attempt unless the defendant intentionally commits an act tending to the commission of a crime, which is so near to accomplishment of the crime that in all reasonable probability the crime itself would have been committed but for timely interference.
What is the actus reus analysis for attempt liability?
Use the legal tests for distinguishing mere preparation and criminal attempt:
- Physical Proximity Test
- Dangerous Proximity Test
- Indispensable Element Test
- Probable Desistance Test
- Res Ipsa Loquitur / Unequivocality Test
- MPC “Substantial step” test
What is a criminal conspiracy?
An agreement (express or implied) between two or more individuals to commit a criminal act or series of criminal acts, or to accomplish a legal duty by unlawful means (Carter)
What is the rule from Pinkerton? (conspiracy)
A defendant who conspires with another person is criminally liable for all substantive offenses committed by the coconspirator in furtherance of the conspiracy, even if the defendant did not know about the coconspirator’s acts and did not assist him in any manner.
Does the MPC follow the Pinkerton doctrine?
No
What is the overt act requirement of conspiracy? (MPC and majority of jurisdictions)
Any member of the conspiracy must have committed an overt act “in furtherance of the conspiracy” in order to be prosecuted
Ex: getting supplies; making a phone call
What is the mens rea for conspiracy?
Dual intent: (1) intent to agree and (2) intent to commit the target offense (Swain)
What was the rule from People v. Swain? (conspiracy)
A conviction for conspiracy to commit murder requires proof of the specific intent to kill.
What is the rule from Commonwealth v. Azim? (conspiracy)
A conviction of conspiracy may be based solely upon circumstantial evidence. (Azim was the getaway driver for the criminals)
What is the difference between bilateral and unilateral conspiracy?
Under the bilateral theory of conspiracy, the crime of conspiracy requires an actual agreement between two or more people to perform an illegal act.
The unilateral theory of conspiracy: it doesn’t matter what the other person does, if you seriously enter into the agreement then you committed conspiracy
(People v. Foster)
Does the MPC follow the bilateral theory or unilateral theory of conspiracy?
Unilateral
What is the rule from State v. Hoselton? (accomplice)
A defendant is not a principal in the second degree unless he participates in the crime while sharing the criminal intent of the principal in the first degree. (defendant stood on a barge while friends committed crimes)
What is the natural-and-probable consequences doctrine?
An accessory is liable for any criminal act which in the ordinary course of things was the natural and probable consequence of the crime that he advised or commanded, although such consequence may not have been intended by him
What is the mens rea for accomplice liability?
Dual intent requirement: common law
(1) Intent to do the acts that constitute “assistance” of the primary part AND
(2) Intent that such assistance result in commission of the offense charged
MPC § 2.06(3)(a)
What was the rule from State v. Linscott? (accomplice)
The natural-and-probable-consequence doctrine does not violate the Fourteenth Amendment Due Process Clause.
Does the MPC follow the natural and probable consequences doctrine?
No, a person must have the requisite culpability specific to the result crime to be held liable as an accomplice
What is the actus reus of accomplice liability?
The secondary party solicited the offense, furnished an instrumentality used in in the commission of the crime, or provided other significant active aid
What is the rule from State v. VT? (accomplice)
Evidence of mere presence is insufficient to demonstrate complicity in a crime.
What is the rule from State v. Helmenstein? (Accomplice)
A criminal defendant may not be convicted based on the testimony of an accomplice if there is no other corroborating evidence connecting the defendant to the commission of the offense. (I want bananas was an accomplice)
What is the rule from People v. Genoa? (accomplice)
A defendant who intends to aid and abet a crime that subsequently never takes place cannot be convicted as an accomplice to that crime.
What is the MPC approach to accomplice liability when the underlying crime does not occur?
If you attempt to aid in a crime that doesn’t happen, but you would have been considered an accomplice under § 2.06 if the crime had occurred, you can be liable
