CrimLaw—Inchoate Crimes Flashcards
(27 cards)
What’s an inchoate offense?
An inchoate offense occurs when a person’s criminal activity stops short of completion.
TIP: all inchoate offenses are specific intent crimes.
What are the 2 elements of solicitation?
Requires:
- Actual Rey’s, or counseling, inciting , or inducing someone to commit an offense;
- Mens rea, or acting w/the specific purpose or intent to cause that person to commit the crime.
TIP: solicitation merges w/the completed offense.
What is the 2-part legal standard for conspiracy under CL?
Conspiracy at CL requires:
- An agreement between 2+ persons (actus reus); AND
- The specific intent to both enter into the agreement to achieve the agreement’s criminal objective (men’s rea).
TIP: Conspiracy does not merge w/the underlying offense.
What are the 2 elements of attempt?
Attempt requires:
- Mens rea, the specific intent to commit a crime; AND
- Actus reus, an overt act that goes beyond mere preparation.
What are the 2 elements of the Pinkerton Rule?
Under the P rule, a conspirator will be liable for the crimes of their co-conspirators IF those crimes were:
- Committed in furtherance of the conspiracy; AND
- Foreseeable, i.e., “ a natural and probable consequence of the conspiracy.
TIP: The P rule is a judicially created doctrine.
Is factual impossibility a defense to solicitation?
No. Factual impossibility is not a viable defense that the criminal solicitation itself could not have been successful.
TIP: Ex. A D who solicits an undercover agent to purchase drugs is guilty of solicitation.
What is a “chain” conspiracy involving multiple conspirators?
A “chain” conspiracy involves a single, large conspiracy containing a series of agreements between interrelated parties (each sub-agreement is a “link” in the main “chain” relationship).
HHHYPO: In a CL jxn, if each of a D’s co-conspirators is acquitted of conspiracy, may the remaining D still be convicted of conspiracy?
No. CL conspiracy requires 2+ guilty parties, which means the acquittal of all co-conspirators except one will mandate the acquittal of the remaining D.
What are 2-elements of the mens rea element of conspiracy?
mens rea of conspiracy requires the specific intent to:
- Enter into an agreement, which may be inferred from one’s conduct; AND
- Achieve the agreement’s criminal objective.
HYPO: If a co-conspirator has effectively withdrawn from a conspiracy, will they be liable for the crimes committed by their co-conspirators?
No. Even if the conspirator would be liable for the crimes of their co-conspirators (under the Pinkerton rule) the legally effective withdrawal from the conspiracy will be a defense.
Under the CL, is withdrawal a defense to conspiracy?
Generally No. A D completes the conspiracy when they have reached the agreement and carried out the overt act.
TIP: but, withdrawals may be a defense to liability for subsequent crimes committed by co-conspirators.
What is the mens rea required for attempt?
Attempt requires proof of the specific intent to commit the underlying offense, regardless of whether the target offense is a general or specific intent crime.
TIP: Ex, attempted murder is a specific intent crime even though the crime of murder only requires general intent.
What’s the majority approach to the actus reus element of attempt?
The majority rule (and MPC approach) is that the D must commit an overt act, beyond mere preparation, which constitutes a “substantial step” towards the actual commission of the crime.
TIP: the traditional rule was that the “proximity” approach, which required an act coming dangerously close to completion of the crime.
Is factual impossibility a defense to attempt?
No. FI is not a defense to attempt (i.e., the D is guilty even if the attempted crime cannot be completed b/c of facts unknown to the D at the time of their overt act).
TIP: only true legal impossibility is a defense to attempt, which means the D misunderstood the law, believing it was a crime to doe something when they set out to do it, but it was not actually a crime.
Under the majority rule, is withdrawal a defense to attempt?
No. The majority rule is that withdrawal (or abandonment) is never a defense to attempt.
TIP: But, a minority of states and the MPC allow a withdrawal defense IF the abandonment is voluntary and not due to difficulty or increased risk, and is a complete abandonment, not merely a postponement.
Does the murder doctrine apply to the crime of solicitation?
Yes. If a D solicits another to commit a crime and that person completes the crime, the D may not be convicted of both solicitation and the completed crime; the crimes merge into one charged offense.
Is withdrawal a defense to solicitation?
No. Generally, withdrawal is not a defense to the crime of solicitation.
TIP: the MPC allows withdrawal if the D voluntarily and completely renounces AND prevents the commission of the solicited crime, but most jxns don’t follow this approach.
What are two elements of the actus reus element of conspiracy under the modern rule.
Modern rule for the actus reus element of conspiracy requires BOTH:
- An AGREEMENT between 2+ parties; AND
- An OVERT ACT in furtherance of the conspiracy.
Does the merger doctrine apply to the crime of conspiracy?
No. A D who commits conspiracy to commit a crime AND completes that crime may be convicted of both conspiracy and the completed offense; the crimes do not “merge” together.
Is factual impossibility a defense to conspiracy?
No. If the D conspired to commit a crime that could never have been actually completed, they may still be found guilty of conspiracy.
HHHYPO: if a D agreed to commit a crime w/a police officer who did not have genuine criminal intent, may the D be convicted of conspiracy under the modern rule?
Yes. The modern rule is a “unilateral” approach, meaning that even if the D is the only party w/a guilty mind, they may still be convicted of conspiracy.
TIP: the traditional rule was that the agreement had to be “bilateral” meaning at least 2 guilty minds.
Does the merger doctrine apply to the crime of attempt?
Yes. A D who attempts to commit a crime and successfully completes it may not be convicted of both the attempt and the completed crime; the crimes ”merge” into he completed offense.
What is a “hub-and-spoke” conspiracy involving multiple co-conspirators?
It’s when a single D enters into separate, independent conspiracies w/different, unrelated parties (the central D is the “hub,” and each conspiracy is a “spoke”).
What is the 3-part legal standard for conspiracy in most states?
In the majority of Jxns, a conspiracy requires:
- An agreement between 2+ people;
- The specific intent to both enter into the agreement and to achieve the agreement’s criminal objective; AND
- An overt act in furtherance of the unlawful objective.
TIP: any act, even one of mere preparation, taken by a co-conspirator satisfies this requirement. The act need not be criminal in nature.
