Flashcards in Page 8 Deck (36):
What are the elements of conspiracy?
– Agreement to work together
– Intent to achieve unlawful purpose
– Overt act in furtherance of the agreement
What does the element "agreement to work together" in conspiracy mean?
Two parties make an agreement to commit a crime
Why are conspiracies so hard to prove?
Because they are done in secret
How can statements made by one conspirator be used against another?
vicarious admission: statements of one conspirator made during the course of the conspiracy can be used against the other
How long does a conspiracy remain in effect?
Until it is abandoned or achieved
What are some different ways that an agreement can be shown for conspiracy?
Gestures like a nod, wink, handshake.
When direct evidence isn't available for conspiracy what kind of evidence is heavily relied on?
What happens when one party never intended to agree to a conspiracy?
CL: plurality of agreement
MPC and modern: unilateral approach
What is the CL plurality of agreement approach in conspiracy?
Must be at least two guilty parties, so acquittal of all others precludes the defendant's conviction
What is the MPC unilateral approach to conspiracy?
Requires only agreement by the defendant. One conspirator's liability does not affect the other's
How does conspiracy between spouses work?
CL: they are considered one party
Modern: spouses can be convicted
How does Conspiracy work when a corporation is involved?
Corporations can be co-conspirators as long as there are two distinct participants. If there's only one human actor involved - lack of mutual encouragement, and no conspiracy
What does the element "intent to achieve unlawful purpose" mean?
Specific intent to have the illegal goal succeed
At common law if it can be shown that the defendant had knowledge that a crime would happen, and a stake in the activity, is that enough to prove intent for conspiracy?
What does a stake in criminal activity mean?
Benefit to the defendant
If you rent a hotel room to a prostitute knowing what she will do, is that a conspiracy to commit prostitution?
Not unless you have knowledge plus a stake in the venture
What Is required to establish intent to achieve unlawful purpose for conspiracy at common-law?
Intent to enter the agreement, and intent to have the unlawful act take place
What is the common law bilateral rule?
There must be two guilty minds, so if one person can't be prosecuted, there is no conspiracy ie) undercover agent
If one party to conspiracy has diplomatic immunity, can there still be a conspiracy?
How can corporations be members of conspiracies?
As long as two human beings are involved
What is the MPC's version of the intent element of conspiracy?
Must have a purpose to promote or facilitate the crime
How can you infer a conspirator's purpose so they can be guilty for conspiracy?
– Had a stake in the venture
– Provided goods/services with no legitimate purpose
– A disproportionate amount of their business went to the endeavor
What does an overt act in furtherance of the agreement for conspiracy mean?
At least one of the parties must commit an overt act toward the commission of the crime
Is the overt act requirement for conspiracy always necessary?
It is now the majority rule, and the MPC Rule... But sometimes it's not necessary
What is an overt act?
Any legal or illegal act done by any of the conspirators to set the conspiracy in motion
Examples of an overt act:
– Unexplained possession of a lot of dynamite
– Interview with a lawyer
– Calling a bank
Common law requires that the object of the conspiracy be what?
Does the overt act for conspiracy need to be criminal?
No, it can be as simple as buying a newspaper
What is the MPC caveat for the overt act requirement of conspiracy?
Conspiracies to commit felonies of the 1st/2nd degree are excepted from the overt act requirement
Should a bar answer ever depend on the presence or absence of an overt act for conspiracy?
No because there's so much variation between the laws
How does vicarious liability apply to conspiracy?
Any crime committed that is both in furtherance of the conspiracy, and a reasonably foreseeable result of it makes all conspirators liable
How do you know if crimes by the conspirators are within the scope of the conspiracy?
They are foreseeable crimes done in furtherance of the conspiracy goal
If a crime is clearly outside the agreement between the conspirators, even if it was foreseeable, does that result in vicarious liability?
How are co-conspirators liable for subsequent crimes in conspiracy?
If the crime is likely to occur and foreseeable as a direct and natural result of the first crime through an unbroken chain of causation
If you kidnap someone and lock her in the basement when you know your roommate is a rapist, and when you go out he rapes her, what is your liability for the rape?
Vicariously liable on accomplice theory because she wouldn't have been raped but for your kidnapping and leaving her somewhere it was likely to happen. Crime was foreseeable and the direct and natural result of what you did