Vicarious Liability

Question 1

Accomplice Liability (Aiding and Abetting, Accessory)

Answer 1

1. A person is an accomplice to another in the commission of an offense if he intentionally assists them to engage in the conduct that constitutes the crime
2. The essence of accomplice liability lies in providing some aid to the principal perpetrator while also having the required mens rea
   
   1. Assisting, encouraging, soliciting, procuring, advising, or counseling
   2. Includes assistance by physical conduct, assistance by psychological influence, and assistance by omission
3. Where a person is an accomplice, he will be liable for all crimes committed by the principal actor that are a NATURAL AND PROBABLE CONSEQUENCE of the crime in which the accomplice assisted
   
   1. If you are an aider or abettor, you are as guilty as the principal actor
   2. Those who are accessories after the fact are not vicariously liable for the crime of the principal

Question 2

Accomplice Liability: A central question concerns how much and what kind of aid the third party must have rendered, and with what mens rea

Answer 2

1. Mere presence at the crime scene is not enough to justify conviction as an accomplice
   
   1. Must include some kind of encouragement, at the very least
2. A person is not an accomplice if he performs an act to assist but his conduct is wholly ineffectual
3. Any aid, no matter how trivial, suffices to make someone liable as an accomplice, as long as they have the required mens rea

Question 3

To gain a conviction (for aiding and abetting, accessory), the prosecution must show:

Answer 3

1. Assistance to the principal in committing an offense
2. Mens rea
   
   1. Intent to assist the principal to engage in the conduct that forms the basis of the offense; and
   2. The mental state required for the crime as stated in the definition of the substantive crime (State v. Parker)

Causation is not required for liability as an aider and abettor

1. It is not a defense to say that the others would have done it even if I didn’t assist
2. A secondary party is accountable for the conduct of the primary party even if his assistance was causally unnecessary to the commission of the offense

It is possible for an accomplice to be convicted of a more serious crime than the primary party if their mens rea is different

Question 4

Conspiracy Liability

Answer 4

1. Characterized as an agreement
2. Actual assistance in the crime is not required
3. In most circumstances, an accomplice is also a conspirator with the primary party in the commission of the crime
4. Conspiracy is both a separate crime and a theory by which a third party can be vicariously liable for criminal acts committed by a co-conspirator
   
   1. A form of vicarious liability for the substantive offense of another (Pinkerton doctrine)
      
      1. A party to a conspiracy is responsible for any criminal act committed by an associate if: (1) it was committed in furtherance of the conspiracy; and (2) is a foreseeable consequence of the unlawful agreement
   2. A separate crime that subjects the offender to an additional punishment
5. Where a person is a co-conspirator, he will be liable for all crimes committed by another co-conspirator that are a FORESEEABLE consequence of the conspiracy to commit the agreed-upon crime

Question 5

To gain a conviction (for conspiracy), the prosecution must show:

Answer 5

1. Actus reus
   
   1. An agreement between two or more persons to commit an unlawful act or acts (proof of an agreement usually involves inference)
2. Mens rea
   
   1. Two or more persons must:
      
      1. Intend to agree; AND
      2. Intend to achieve the object of the conspiracy

Question 6

Conspiracy: Degree of involvement (People v. Louis Lauria)

How much involvement is enough to make one liable on a conspiracy theory?

When can an actor’s conduct be said to have manifested an agreement to commit a crime?

Answer 6

1. The essence of conspiracy liability lies in agreeing to commit a criminal act, although often jurisdictions require an overt act in furtherance of the plan
   
   1. The Model Penal Code states that no person may be convicted of conspiracy, other than a felony of the first or second degree, unless an overt act in pursuance of such conspiracy is proved
2. The intent of a supplier who knows of the criminal use to which his supplies are put to participate in the criminal activity connected with the use of his supplies may be established by:
   
   1. Direct evidence that he intends to participate, OR
   2. Through an inference that he intends to participate based on:
      
      1. His special interest in the activity (stake in the venture), OR
      2. The aggravated nature of the crime itself