Criminal Conspiracy
Criminal conspiracy
Conspiracy involves the mutual agreement or understanding, express or implied, between two or more persons to commit a criminal act or a legal act by unlawful means. Proof of the overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy is not necessary.
A two-fold specific intent is required for conspiracy; the intent to combine with others and the intent to accomplish unlawful objectives.
Since conspiracy is complete upon formation of the agreement, subsequent withdrawal is not a defense.
Furthermore, a conspiracy does not automatically end when the object of the conspiracy becomes impossible to achieve, even when the conspirators are unaware that the government has intervened and "defeated" the conspiracy's object. Impossibility does not terminate conspiracy because the essence of the conspiracy is an agreement to commit an unlawful act and such agreements are by themselves dangerous, even where no substantive crime ensues. US v Recio, 537 US 270; 122 SCt 819; 154 LEd2d 744 (2003).
Reprinted from the Criminal Defense blog of Cy Abdo, criminal defense attorney in Sterling Heights and surrounding areas.
Conspiracy involves the mutual agreement or understanding, express or implied, between two or more persons to commit a criminal act or a legal act by unlawful means. Proof of the overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy is not necessary.
A two-fold specific intent is required for conspiracy; the intent to combine with others and the intent to accomplish unlawful objectives.
Since conspiracy is complete upon formation of the agreement, subsequent withdrawal is not a defense.
Furthermore, a conspiracy does not automatically end when the object of the conspiracy becomes impossible to achieve, even when the conspirators are unaware that the government has intervened and "defeated" the conspiracy's object. Impossibility does not terminate conspiracy because the essence of the conspiracy is an agreement to commit an unlawful act and such agreements are by themselves dangerous, even where no substantive crime ensues. US v Recio, 537 US 270; 122 SCt 819; 154 LEd2d 744 (2003).
Reprinted from the Criminal Defense blog of Cy Abdo, criminal defense attorney in Sterling Heights and surrounding areas.
Comments
Post a Comment