Inchoate Crimes Flashcards Preview

Crim Law > Inchoate Crimes > Flashcards

Flashcards in Inchoate Crimes Deck (75):
1

INCHOATE OFFENSES
Inchoate Crimes - Types

1. Attempt
2. Solicitation
3. Conspiracy

2

INCHOATE OFFENSES
Inchoate Definition

Imperfect, incomplete

3

ATTEMPT
Types

1. Complete attempt
2. Incomplete attempt

4

ATTEMPT
Complete Attempt

Took all steps necessary but failed or missed target

5

ATTEMPT
Incomplete Attempt

Took many of the steps toward completion but quit, was interrupted, or was apprehended

6

ATTEMPT
Attempt @ Common Law
(Type of View, Test, Focus, Requires)

OBJECTIVIST VIEW
Proximity Test
- Focus = conduct that exhibits discernible criminality (from the view of a 3P) at time it occurs
- Requires an act dangerously close to success

7

ATTEMPT
Attempt under MPC
(Type of View, Test, Focus, Requires)

SUBJECTIVIST VIEW
Substantial Step Requirement (Majority)
- Focus = D's subjective intent, any act that seems to confirm D's intent to commit crime
- Requires strong corroborations of actor's criminal purpose

8

ATTEMPT
Common Law Tests for Attempt

Vary by jurisdiction
1. Physical proximity
2. Dangerous proximity
3. Indispensable element
4. Probable distance
5. Abnormal step
6. Unequivocality

9

ATTEMPT
Renunciation of Criminal Purpose under MPC
(What does it allow and when?)

Allows voluntary abandonment defense when you renounce your criminal purpose

10

ATTEMPT
Voluntary Abandonment @ Common Law
(Is it a valid defense and when does it occur?)

VALID DEFENSE
Occurs when D is motivated to drop his plan by his conscience or a change of heart

11

ATTEMPT
Involuntary Abandonment @ Common Law
(Is it a valid defense and when does it occur?)

NOT A VALID DEFENSE
Occurs when D is intercepted or caught in the act by someone else

12

ATTEMPT
Proximity @ Common Law
(Key Inquiry)

Was D close enough to completing the crime to hold him liable?

13

ATTEMPT
Substantial Step under MPC
(Key Inquiry)

Did D take substantial steps toward completing crime?

14

INCHOATE OFFENSES
Doctrine of Merger @ Common Law
(What type of crime were they considered?)

- Inchoate offenses were regarded as misdemeanors
- If the principal offense was carried out = felonies

15

INCHOATE OFFENSES
Merger for Conspiracy

MAJORITY APPROACH
- Abandoned doctrine of merger
- Allows accused to be convicted of BOTH conspiracy and principal offense

16

INCHOATE OFFENSES
Merger for Solicitation

- Uses doctrine of merger
- Cannot be convicted of solicitation and principal offense

17

INCHOATE OFFENSES
Merger for Attempt

- Uses doctrine of merger
- Cannot be convicted of attempt and principal offense

18

ATTEMPT
Elements

1. Specific intent to commit the crime AND
2. Overt act in furtherance of that intent

19

ATTEMPT
Intent
(3 Key Takeaways)

- Intent to perform an act and obtain a result that, if achieved, would constitute a crime
- Requires specific intent, regardless of intent required for completed offense (including strict liability)
- Crimes requiring recklessness or negligence cannot be attempted

20

ATTEMPT
Overt Act

Must have committed an act beyond mere preparation for the offense

21

ATTEMPT
Defenses

1. Impossibility of Success
2. Abandonment

22

ATTEMPT
Legal Impossibility
(Is it a valid defense? What is it?)

VALID DEFENSE (but very rare)
If D, having completed all acts he intended, would have committed not crime = cannot be guilty when he fails to complete all intended acts

23

ATTEMPT
Factual Impossibility
(Is it a valid defense? What is it? What is the test?)

NO DEFENSE
- Substantive crime is incapable of completion due to some physical or factual condition unknown to D
- TEST = If attendant circumstances were as D believed them to be and D completed all acts intended, would D have committed a crime?

24

ATTEMPT
Abandonment: If a defendant has, with the required intent, gone beyond preparation, may she escape liability by abandoning her plans?
(Valid defense? Under which approach? Requirements?)

Majority rule = NO, NEVER A DEFENSE

MPC approach = Valid defense only if
1. Fully voluntary and not made because of the difficulty of completing the crime or increased risk of apprehension AND
2. Complete abandonment under circumstances manifesting renunciation of criminal purpose, not just a decision to postpone

25

ATTEMPT
Prosecution

Charged with completed crime = can be convicted or either crime or attempt

Charged with attempt = cannot be convicted of completed crime

26

ATTEMPT
Punishment

Majority approach = penalty up to 1/2 max penalty for completed crime

MPC = may be punished to same extent as completed crime, except capital crimes and most serious felonies

27

SOLICITATION
Elements (2)

1. Inciting, counseling, advising, inducing, commanding another to commit a crime
2. With specific intent the person solicited commit the crime
(Regardless of whether crime is committed or person even agreed)

28

SOLICITATION
Factual Impossibility
(Defense? Measured by? Example?)

NO DEFENSE
Culpability measured by circumstances as she believed them to be
Ex. Solicited a police undercover agent

29

SOLICITATION
Liability

Person solicited commits crime = solicitor liable for crime as a party

Person solicited attempts = solicitor liable for attempt as a party

30

SOLICITATION
Renunciation/Withdrawal @ Common Law
(Valid Defense? When?)

NO DEFENSE that she changed her mind or countermanded her advice, after solicitation was made

31

SOLICITATION
Renunciation/Withdrawal under MPC
(Valid Defense? When?)

VALID DEFENSE if D prevents commission of crime

32

SOLICITATION
Exemption from Intended Crime
(Valid Defense? When? Example?)

VALID DEFENSE if solicitor could not be guilty of intended crime because of legislative intent to exempt her
(Example: minor female urging adult male to have sex with her)

33

CONSPIRACY
Elements (3)

1. Agreement between 2+ persons to commit criminal act
2. Overt act by member of conspiracy AND
3. Specific intent BOTH to agree and to achieve objective

34

CONSPIRACY
Overt Act
(Required by whom? 3 Elements?)

- Not required @ common law
- Required by MPC and modern trend
1. Act in furtherance of the conspiracy
2. By a member of conspiracy
3. Can be act of mere preparation (justified by dangers inherent in group crime, allows for early intervention by law enforcement)

35

CONSPIRACY
Intent to Commit the Crime
(Required intent + 2 Key Takeaways)

Specific intent to enter into agreement to achieve objective of agreement
- Need not be express, can be inferred from conduct
- Complete upon agreement

36

CONSPIRACY
If there are multiple crimes, how many conspiracies are there?

If there is an initial agreement among the parties to engage in a course of criminal conduct constituting all crimes = ONLY ONE CONSPIRACY

37

CONSPIRACY
# of Conspiracies in Multiple Party Situations
(2 Types)

1. Chain Relationship = ONE LARGE CONSPIRACY
2. Hub-and-Spoke Relationship = MULTIPLE CONSPIRACIES

38

CONSPIRACY
Chain Relationship
(3 Elements = ?)

1. Series of agreements
2. Regarded as part of a single large scheme
3. In which all of the parties to the subagreements (links) are interested
= One large conspiracy involving all of the
participants

39

CONSPIRACY
Hub-and-Spoke Relationship
(3 Elements = ?)

1. One common member (hub) enters into
2. Many subagreements (spokes) that are reasonably independent of each other
3. With different persons who have little of no interest in whether the other agreements succeed
= Multiple different and independent conspiracies (of which each member is only conspiring on his own spoke conspiracy)

40

CONSPIRACY
Requirement of Two or More Parties
(2 Approaches)

1. MPC (Modern Trend) = Unilateral Approach
2. Common Law (Traditional Rule) = Bilateral Approach

41

CONSPIRACY
Unilateral Approach

Only one party required to have genuine criminal intent under MPC (modern trend)
= even if one person is faking, can still be convicted

42

CONSPIRACY
Bilateral Approach

At least two "guilty minds" who are actually committed to illicit plan @ common law
= If one person is only feigning agreements, other party cannot be convicted

- Undercover cop = no conspiracy
- Husband and wife = one person so no conspiracy without 3P
- Corporation and agent = corp can only act through and agent so no conspiracy between corp and single agent acting on its behalf

43

CONSPIRACY
Wharton Rule

Where >2 are necessary for substantive offense, no conspiracy unless more parties participate in the agreement than
are necessary for the crime
(Examples: adultery, dueling, sale of contraband)

44

CONSPIRACY
Agreement with Person in Protected Class

If conspirators agree to violates a statute designed to protect persons in a given class = person within that class cannot be guilty of the crime itself or conspiracy
(Example: Mann Act)

45

CONSPIRACY
Effect of Acquittal + Exception

- Acquittal of ALL alleged co-conspirators to D = precludes conviction of D
- Does not apply where other parties
1. Are not apprehended
2. Are charged with lesser offenses OR
3. Are not longer being prosecuted (nolle prosequi)

46

CONSPIRACY
Inferences of Intent
- to Agree
- to Facilitate Conspiracy

- INTENT TO AGREE = may be inferred from conduct
- INTENT TO FACILITATE CONSPIRACY = cannot be inferred from mere knowledge

47

CONSPIRACY
Pinkerton Rule: Liability for Crimes of Co-Conspirators
(2 Elements, Application, MPC Approach)

PINKERTON RULE
Each conspirator may be liable for the crimes of all other conspirators if the crimes were:
1. Committed in furtherance of the conspiracy's objectives
2. Natural and probable consequence of the conspiracy (foreseeable)

- Applies only if conspirator has not made a legally effective withdrawal before commission of crime by co-conspirator
- Rejected by MPC

48

CONSPIRACY
Termination of Conspiracy
(3 Types = Valid Defense?)

1. Government frustration of conspiracy's objective = NO DEFENSE
2. Factual Impossibility = NO DEFENSE
3. Withdrawal = NO DEFENSE (except to subsequent crimes by co-conspirators)

49

CONSPIRACY
Withdrawal
(Approach + 2 Elements)

@ COMMON LAW
Can only limit liability for SUBSEQUENT acts of co-conspirators by
1. Performing an affirmative act that notifies ALL members of conspiracy AND
2. Gives enough notice that they have opportunity to abandon plans

50

CONSPIRACY
Corrupt Motive Doctrine
(Approaches + Requirement + Exception + Limitation)

MAJORITY = REJECT, conspirators need not be aware their plan is an illegal one

MINORITY = ACCEPT
- Parties to conspiracy must have known their objective was criminal
- Exception to general rule that ignorance of the law is no excuse
- Usually limited to malum prohibitum offenses

51

CONSPIRACY
Renunciation
(Approach + 2 Elements)

Under MPC
If provided material assistance, must
1. Attempt to neutralize assistance/thwart conspiracy
2. In such a manner that demonstrates complete and voluntary renunciation

52

CONSPIRACY
Punishment @ Common Law

Always a misdemeanor

53

CONSPIRACY
Punishment in Modern Trend

Variations but usually less punishment than completed crime

54

CONSPIRACY
Punishment under MPC

Same level as crime to be committed

55

CONSPIRACY
Blockburger Test
(Use + Analysis)

- Used to determine whether single act that violated two laws constituted one or two separate offenses (for purposes of double jeopardy)
- If each law requires proof of some fact other does not = two separate offenses

56

COMPLICITY
Parties to a Crime @ Common Law

1. Principals in the 1st degree
2. Principals in the 2nd degree
3. Accessories before the fact
4. Accessories after the fact

57

COMPLICITY
Principals in the 1st degree @ Common Law

Actually commits crime

58

COMPLICITY
Principals in the 2nd degree @ Common Law

1. Aids, commands, or assists AND
2. Is actually or constructively present

59

COMPLICITY
Accessories before the fact @ Common Law

1. Aids, commands, or assists AND
2. Is not present

60

COMPLICITY
Accessories after the fact @ Common Law

Persons who assist the principal after the crime in avoiding arrest, trial or convict with knowledge of principal's guilt

61

COMPLICITY
Accessory Conviction @ Common Law

Cannot be convicted unless principal's guilt determined first by jury

62

COMPLICITY
Parties to a Crime under MPC
(3 Types + Culpability)

1. Principal
2. Accomplice
3. Accessory after the Fact

**All parties to the crime can be found
guilty of the criminal offense**

63

COMPLICITY
Assistance
(4 Sufficient Types + 1 Insufficient Types)

1. By physical conduct
2. By psychological influence
3. By omission if had duty to act
4. Any aid, no matter how trivial, can suffice

**Mere presence alone is insufficient**

64

COMPLICITY
Principal under MPC

Person with required mental state who commits crime himself (or through innocent, irresponsible, or unwilling agent)

65

COMPLICITY
Accomplice under MPC
(2 Elements + Liability)

Person who
1. with intent to assist the principal AND intent crime be committed (dual intent)
2. actually aids, counsels, or encourages the principal before or during the commission of the crime
= Equally as liable as principal

66

COMPLICITY
Accessory after the fact under MPC
(4 Elements + Liability)

Person who
1. receives, relieves, comforts, or assists another
2. knowing he has committed a felony
3. in order to help the felon escape arrest, trial, or conviction
4. after felony has been completed
= Less culpability, lesser punishment

67

COMPLICITY
Termination
(Approaches + Validity as Defense + Requirements)

Common Law = NO DEFENSE

MPC = VALID DEFENSE if
prior to commission of crime
1. Wholly deprives prior assistance of effectiveness OR
2. Gives timely warning to law enforcement OR
3. Otherwise makes proper effort to prevent commission of offense

68

COMPLICITY
Causation

Not required = liability comes from participation, causation derived from principal

69

COMPLICITY
Feigned Accomplice
(Validity as Defense + Liability)

Valid defense = not liable if participating to entrap another

70

COMPLICITY
Willfully Ignorant Accomplice
(Validity as Defense + Liability)

No defense = still liable for complicity (Ostrich Instruction)

71

COMPLICITY
Indifferent Accomplice
(Validity as Defense + Liability)

No defense = still liable

72

COMPLICITY
Liability in Negligence Crimes + Reasoning

Cannot be accomplice to crime of negligence because
--> Complicity requires intent, accomplice derives intent from principal
--> Principal in negligence crimes do not have knowledge/intent to commit crime

73

COMPLICITY
Secondary Crimes
(Liability of accomplice in crimes that occur during enactment of intended crime)

Accomplice is liable for crimes that occur unexpectedly in enactment of intent crime, despite lack of knowledge or lack of participation

74

COMPLICITY
Agreement with Person in Protected Class
(Description + Liability of Protected Person + Example)

If conspirators agree to violates a statute designed to protect persons in a given class = person within that class cannot be guilty of the crime itself or conspiracy
(Example: Mann Act)

75

COMPLICITY
Inability to Be Principal
(Validity as Defense, Rule)

NO DEFENSE
One who may not be convicted of being principal = still can be convicted of being accomplice