conspiracy agreement to commit a crime

(Study Tips, Dealing With Stress, Maintaining a Social Life, Financial Aid, Internships, Bar Exam, Careers in Law . . . )
unclej
Posts: 36
Joined: Fri May 16, 2014 9:36 pm

conspiracy agreement to commit a crime

Postby unclej » Tue Jun 02, 2015 10:32 am

I have a quick question about conspiracy.

I understand conspiracy is an agreement to commit a crime. Elements are: intent to agree, intent to accomplish the objective of the agreement, and an overt act in furtherance of the agreement.

I was checking out an old bar essay and A tells B to bring a stolen painting to such and such location so A can buy it.
The sample answer says this is a conspiracy, but I don't see how this is a conspiracy.
I thought all conspirators must have the same goal. Here, A is trying to BUY and B is trying to SELL.

If A and B agreed to go to the museum and steal a painting, that would be a conspiracy because they both had the same goal.

But is buying and selling stolen property a conspiracy?

User avatar
A. Nony Mouse
Posts: 22779
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 11:51 am

Re: conspiracy agreement to commit a crime

Postby A. Nony Mouse » Tue Jun 02, 2015 10:54 am

Buying stolen property is a crime.

A wants to buy stolen property.

A asks B to help him buy stolen property by bringing the stolen painting wherever.

Presumably B agrees to do so and takes some kind of overt act in furtherance.

They do have the same goal - for A to buy stolen property.

B could probably additionally get charged with selling stolen property, and you could probably charge both with conspiracy for that, too (selling stolen property is a crime; A asks B to sell him the stolen property; B agrees with A to sell him the stolen property).

Stolen looks really weird now that I've typed it so many times.

unclej
Posts: 36
Joined: Fri May 16, 2014 9:36 pm

Re: conspiracy agreement to commit a crime

Postby unclej » Tue Jun 02, 2015 11:28 am

A. Nony Mouse wrote:Buying stolen property is a crime.

A wants to buy stolen property.

A asks B to help him buy stolen property by bringing the stolen painting wherever.

Presumably B agrees to do so and takes some kind of overt act in furtherance.

They do have the same goal - for A to buy stolen property.

B could probably additionally get charged with selling stolen property, and you could probably charge both with conspiracy for that, too (selling stolen property is a crime; A asks B to sell him the stolen property; B agrees with A to sell him the stolen property).

Stolen looks really weird now that I've typed it so many times.


got it, thanks
I just thought of another issue. wouldn't wharton's rule apply here? to buy stolen property, you need 2 people. so this is not a conspiracy?

User avatar
A. Nony Mouse
Posts: 22779
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 11:51 am

Re: conspiracy agreement to commit a crime

Postby A. Nony Mouse » Tue Jun 02, 2015 12:09 pm

Probably, depending on how the crime is defined. If A could be liable for buying stolen property regardless of B's knowledge - say it's a crime for A to knowingly buy stolen property (knowing it's stolen), and B selling it isn't criminalized unless he knows it's stolen, you might still get to conspiracy if B knows and agrees. But generally you're probably right.

CanadianWolf
Posts: 10439
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 4:54 pm

Re: conspiracy agreement to commit a crime

Postby CanadianWolf » Tue Jun 02, 2015 2:41 pm

Is it a crime to knowingly transport stolen property ?

If so, the illegal goal in common is to transport the stolen property to a specific location.

CanadianWolf
Posts: 10439
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 4:54 pm

Re: conspiracy agreement to commit a crime

Postby CanadianWolf » Tue Jun 02, 2015 6:15 pm

Just to be clear: The conspiracy is to transport stolen goods.

Actor A determined the location & obtained the services of Actor B to pick-up & deliver the stolen artwork. Both, therefore, have a goal in common which is illegal & both act in furtherance of that illegal goal.

unclej
Posts: 36
Joined: Fri May 16, 2014 9:36 pm

Re: conspiracy agreement to commit a crime

Postby unclej » Thu Jun 04, 2015 2:07 am

hey guys,
I had another question about conspiracy. This is a question in Flemings, and the answer doesn't make sense to me.

A is wrongfully terminated and he is angry at his boss
he hires B to kill the boss
B kills the boss

according to the answer, this is a conspiracy.
This doesn't make sense to me. A conspiracy is an agreement to commit a crime. If A and B both said "let's kill him" that would be an agreement to commit a crime. They both agreed to go and kill the boss.
But if A tells B to kill, but A doesn't want to be involved in the killing, I don't see how that's a conspiracy. solicitation, yes, but conspiracy??

CanadianWolf
Posts: 10439
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 4:54 pm

Re: conspiracy agreement to commit a crime

Postby CanadianWolf » Thu Jun 04, 2015 10:41 am

You're kidding, right ???

Each has an intent to kill the boss. Each has acted in furtherance of the agreement to kill the boss; one by securing the triggerman & the other by "pulling the trigger".

Solicitation can be both a separate crime & also constitute an act in furtherance of a conspiracy.
Last edited by CanadianWolf on Thu Jun 04, 2015 10:45 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
UnicornHunter
Posts: 13415
Joined: Wed May 01, 2013 9:16 pm

Re: conspiracy agreement to commit a crime

Postby UnicornHunter » Thu Jun 04, 2015 10:45 am

Or, to be nicer than CWolf, you have to remember that the entire purpose of conspiracy is to let us prosecute the big fish who otherwise would keep their hands clean.

CanadianWolf
Posts: 10439
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 4:54 pm

Re: conspiracy agreement to commit a crime

Postby CanadianWolf » Thu Jun 04, 2015 10:46 am

Didn't intend to be mean. Actually thought that this might have been intended as a joke.

OP: Doesn't the Fleming book discuss the correct answer ?
Last edited by CanadianWolf on Thu Jun 04, 2015 10:56 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
A. Nony Mouse
Posts: 22779
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 11:51 am

Re: conspiracy agreement to commit a crime

Postby A. Nony Mouse » Thu Jun 04, 2015 10:54 am

Yeah, the essence of conspiracy is the agreement. It doesn't have to be an agreement that both parties will actually do something ("we'll go kill him together"), just an agreement that the crime will take place ("I want my boss dead. Do you agree to kill him for me?" "Yes."). If A tells B to go kill the boss, A is definitely involved in the killing, just not in the actual physical act.

CanadianWolf
Posts: 10439
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 4:54 pm

Re: conspiracy agreement to commit a crime

Postby CanadianWolf » Thu Jun 04, 2015 11:03 am

If it helps, one's participation in a conspiracy can be a separate crime. Don't stop your analysis simply because one actor has committed a criminal act which is distinct & separate from the other actor or actors participation. In short, as noted above, conspiracy is concerned with an agreement with a goal in common among the actors. The overt acts in furtherance of the agreement can be separate & distinct.

If Actor A was fired & wanted his boss killed, then told Actor B who furnished Actor C's phone number as a potential triggerman & Actor C agreed to do the act, then all three actors are part of a conspiracy to commit murder even though A's separate crime of solicitation is different than C's act of murder.

The more interesting issue is whether doing nothing can constitute an overt act. Does silence & inaction with full knowledge of the agreement to do an illegal act constitute participation in the conspiracy ? Is it another conspiracy to conceal the conspiracy ?

unclej
Posts: 36
Joined: Fri May 16, 2014 9:36 pm

Re: conspiracy agreement to commit a crime

Postby unclej » Thu Jun 04, 2015 12:48 pm

CanadianWolf wrote:
OP: Doesn't the Fleming book discuss the correct answer ?


Thank you, guys. now I get it.
Wolf, to answer your question, the explanations are always very....insufficient. Like "A is correct because this was an agreement to commit a crime. B and C and D are incorrect for the same reason A is correct"

CanadianWolf
Posts: 10439
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 4:54 pm

Re: conspiracy agreement to commit a crime

Postby CanadianWolf » Thu Jun 04, 2015 1:33 pm

OP: I just read your prior posts & noticed that you are currently taking law school courses online in California & preparing for the baby bar in California. For reference material you need to look into hornbooks that thoroughly explain theories & offer concrete examples.

unclej
Posts: 36
Joined: Fri May 16, 2014 9:36 pm

Re: conspiracy agreement to commit a crime

Postby unclej » Sat Jun 06, 2015 12:51 pm

CanadianWolf wrote:OP: I just read your prior posts & noticed that you are currently taking law school courses online in California & preparing for the baby bar in California. For reference material you need to look into hornbooks that thoroughly explain theories & offer concrete examples.


It's funny because I was just about to order Emanuel because I saw a preview on Amazon and I feel like it's exactly what I needed. The school is basically useless and I didn't learn anything.
What do you think of Emanuel vs. Hornbooks? Which one is better?

CanadianWolf
Posts: 10439
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 4:54 pm

Re: conspiracy agreement to commit a crime

Postby CanadianWolf » Sat Jun 06, 2015 3:03 pm

Emanuel's is helpful for exam prep while hornbooks are better for understanding theoretical concepts, therefore it depends upon the individual person & his/her purpose. Some also find the Nutshell series to be helpful (certainly the most affordable).




Return to “Forum for Law School Students”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests