If you solicit you are complicit (MPC) and if solicited aids or comes with, they are complicit.

If you solicit and actor doesn't do it, can still get solicitation.
<-Principle if using innocent agent->

.


Mens Rea -- >
Intentionally aids (helps) or abets (incites or encourages
Presence sometimes enough - remember emboldening
arguments) principle to engage in conduct that
constitutes the crime. ANY AID can sufce. Can be
guilty of reasonably foreseeable consequences.

Most don't allow for liability for attempted complicity
(DIFFERENT FROM MPC, ALSO GEN. NO
ATTEMPT FM)

SOME allow for acc. to be liable in all of prin.'s acts or
any acts in furtherance of original crime/common
purpose if natural and probable. (Kessler - att murder
for being getaway driver, Carson)

If PRIN is completely innocent (b/c he lacks MR or
responsibility) acc. is not guilty of complicity, but
"perpreation by means"

Criminal facilitation: BELIEVING it is probable that he
is rendering aid to a person who intends to commit a
class A felony he aids that person in the criminal
conduct.
Usually charge acc. same as
PRIN.
Sometimes accessory after the
fact (helps concel crime) gets
treated more leniently. Some
now allow for acc. to get higher
grading.




INTENT to aid substantive crime AND
KNOWLEDGE of principle's purpose.

Purpose for AR,MR,Result

Generally acc. couldn't be convicted
until PRIN was and had to be a crime of
same degree. Exception: Murder if MR
of acc is higher than PRIN

Some states have ostrich rule making
one guilty for willfully avoiding/
preventing truth (Giovanetti)

Defenses
Common Law Complicity MPC
2.06(1): Guilty of an offense if committed by himself or someone for whom he is legally accountable.

2.06(2): Legally accountable for conduct of another:
a) with kind of culp. req. for sub. off. you cause innocent or irresponsible person to engage in conduct.
b) Made accountable by law or MPC
c) is an accomplice in commission of offense.

2.06(3): Accomplice if: a) with PURPOSE of promoting/facilitating he: i) solicits (NO COMPLICITY SOLICIT) ii) aid or AGREES
or ATTEMPTS to aid in PLANNING or COMMITTING OR b) conduct is expressly declared by law to establish complicity.
(CAN GET ATTEMPT LIABILITY THROUGH COMPLICITY EVEN IF P NOT GUILTY(5.01(3))

2.06(4) - When result is an element, one can become accomplice if one acts with kind of culpability, IF ANY, with respect to that
result that is sufcient for crime.

2.06(5) - Person who is legally incapable of comitting crime can still commit it via complicity unless that destroys legislative purpose
of incapability.

5.01(3) - can be complicit in attempt EVEN IF actor doesn't commit/attempt crime
Accesorial liability for assisting in avoiding detection:

242.3 - person commits offense if, with PURPOSE, to hinder apprehension, prosecution, conviction or punishment of another he: 1)
harbors/conceals, 2)provides or aids in providing a weapon, transportation, disguise, or other means of avoiding apprehension or
effecting escape, 3) conceals/destroys evidence, witness/document tampering, 4) warns other of impending discovery/
apprehension UNLESS trying to bring other into compliance with law, 5) VOLUNTEERS false info to an LEO.

242.4 - Person commits an offense if he PURPOSELY AIDS another to accomplish unlawful object of crime by safeguarding
proceeds or converting them into negotiable funds. Third degree felony if prin's offense is felony of 1st/2nd, otherwise
misdemeanor.

242.5 - Person commits misdemeanor if he accepts or agrees to accept hush money.

2.06(3): Accomplice if: a) with PURPOSE of promoting/facilitating
he: i) solicits (NO COMPLICITY SOLICIT) ii) aid or AGREES or
ATTEMPTS to aid in PLANNING or COMMITTING OR b)
conduct is expressly declared by law to establish complicity.

Purpose for AR, don't elevate for results, interpretation for AC

2.06(4): When result is an element, one can become accomplice if
one acts with kind of culpability, IF ANY, with respect to that
result that is sufcient for crime. (Etzwieler - would be guilty of neg
homicide in drunk driving keys case)


Defenses
Same as MPC, withdraws
and notifes or deprives it of
effectives.
2.06(6):
Not an accomplice if: a) victim of
offense b) offense is so dened that
conduct is inevitably incident to its
commission c) TERMINATES
complicity prior to offense AND: i)
wholly deprives it of effectives in the
commision of offense OR ii) gives timely
warning to law enforcement OR
otherwise makes proper effort to
prevent the commission of the offense
2.06(7):
Accomplice can be convicted on
proof of comission and his
complicity EVEN IF principle
hasn't been prosecuted/convicted
OR has been convicted of a
different offense or degree of
offense OR has immunity to
prosecution OR has been acquited.
ALWAYS LOOK TO ATTEMPT / COMPLICITY / CONSPIRACY WHEN THERE IS POTENTIAL SOLICITATION
Definition -->
<- Solicitation merges with other inchoates (except for attempted sol.) Solicitation, Attempt, Consp. Merge->

<-Gen. no attempted solicitation, but some allow if attempt doesn't reach target (CA)
Soliciter gets sol. OR attempt -->
If completed, solicitation and complicity merge.
.

With intent that another
person shall engage in
conduct, commands,
encourages, or requests
another to engage in
conduct that would
constitute crime /
attempt

Lesser grading than substantive
offense usually misdemeanor unless
soliciting 1st degree.

Blockburger test - some allow for
inchoate + substantive.

Test: Does each crime require proof
of an additional fact which the other
doesn't?


Requires purpose to solicit

Defenses
Common Law Solicitation MPC
5.02(1) - with PURPOSE of promoting/facilitating:

a) Commands, encourages, or requests another to
engage in specic conduct that would be a crime/
attempted crime OR would establish his complicity in its
commission/attempt
b) Agrees to aid in planning/commission of attempt/
solicit/crime

5.03(2) - Doesn't need to be communicated if conduct is
designed to effect such communication.

2.06(4) - When result is an element, one can become
accomplice if one acts with kind of culpability with
respect to that result that is sufcient

5.02(1) - with PURPOSE of
promoting/facilitating

Defenses
Abandonment -
Unclear, Persuade
person not to execute
or prevent crime with
C+V renunciation.
Abandonment 5.02(3) -
i) persuades other person not to
carry out actions or
ii) Otherwise prevents crime
with complete and voluntary
renunciation of criminal
purpose

5.05(1) - Gets same grading as substantive crime unless 1st
degree (drops to 2nd)
5.05(2) - If conduct is so inerently unlikely to result or
culminate in a crime that neither actor nor conduct is a public
threat, court can mitigate or not charge entirely
5.05(3) - NO conviction of multiple inchoate crimes for same
act
1.07(1)(a) - Can't be convicted of included offenses and
offense.
Included Crimes:
1.07(4)(b) - attempt/solicitation to offend + offense
1.07(4)(a) - Same/less evidence establishes proof
1.07(4)(c) - Offense differs only in that lesser injury
occurred / higher culp. than required for crime
<-- Generally, no unilateral conspiracies
<-- Wharton's Rule: Can't get conspiracy for a crime that requires 2 (e.g., Dueling)
<-- Agreement need not be expressed; Allows unilateral -->
parties need not know all terms as long as
there is unity of essential purpose (Griffin, sheriff mob) No pinkerton or wharton->
.
<-- Turns Conspiracy into Complicity essentially
<-Grading
<-Mult. Conv.
Agreement of two or
more people to
commit a crime.
Modern usually req.
overt act. (Fed Law
says agreement is
overt act).
MINORITY allows consp. + sub. offense
conviction (Callanan, Rationale?
Agreement still dangerous) Some also
allow for conspiring to commit non
crimes.

Blockburger test - some allow for
attempt and conspiracy (Verive) OR
inchoate + substantive.

Test: Does each crime require proof of
an additional fact which the other
doesn't?
Requires intent to agree AND intent
for result

PINKERTON: Liable for
coconspirators acts if: 1) criminal acts
done in furtherance of conspiracy
AND 2) criminal acts must be within
scope of conspiracy AND 3) must be
reasonably foreseeable within scope
of the agreement.
Mistake of law - No
evil purpose to
agreement
Defenses
Common Law Conspiracy
MPC
5.03(1) - with PURPOSE of promoting/facilitating:
a) Agrees with others that they or one ore more will
commit/attempt/solicit a crime
b) Agrees to aid others in planning/commission of
crime OR attempt/solicit the crime

5.03(5) - Overt act req. UNLESS 1st/2nd degree felony
Can be actor OR co-conspirator

5.03(2) - Guilty of conspiracy if conspiring with
unknown people if you conspire w/someone you
know conspires w/ others

5.03(3) - Guilty for only 1 conspiracy as long as multiple
crimes = object of same agr. OR continuous
conspiratorial relationship.


5.03(1) - with PURPOSE of
promoting/facilitating

NO PINKERTON
Defenses
Abandonment - Difcult to
establish as harm already
done, must thwart / tell LEO
Mistake of law 2.04(3) -
Only excuse if it negatives
MR
5.03(6) - Renuniaction a
defense if you thwart
manifesting a complete and
voluntary renunciation of
purpose.
Abandonment 5.03(7)(c) -
Conspiracy terminated for
individual only when he
has told other conspirators
or LEO of his
abandonment (But see (b)
if there is statute)

5.05(1) - Gets same grading as substantive crime unless
1st degree (drops to 2nd)
5.05(2) - If conduct is so inerently unlikely to result or
culminate in a crime that neither actor nor conduct is a
public threat, court can mitigate or not charge entirely
5.05(3) - NO conviction of multiple inchoate crimes for
same act
1.07(1)(b) - NO conviction of Conspiracy + sub. offense
1.07(1)(a) - Can't be convicted of included offenses and
offense.
Included Crimes:
1.07(4)(b) - attempt/solicitation +offfense
1.07(4)(a) - Same/less evidence establishes proof
1.07(4)(c) - Offense differs only in that lesser injury
occurred / higher culp. than required for crime

Lauria (phone hookers)
Provider of services can be liable of conspiracy when:
i) knows of criminal activity ii) intends to
participate: a) has a stake in outcome, b) Grossly
disproportionate prot of business from crime, c)
provides goods/services w/ no lawful use.
ALWAYS LOOK TO SOLICITATION / COMPLICITY / CONSPIRACY AND VICE VERSA
If you solicit and solicited aids or comes with, they are complicit. If you solicit and actor doesn't do it, can still get solicitation.
Definition -->
<- Solicitation + Attempt Merge, usually conspiracy Solicitation, Attempt, Consp. Merge->
<-Gen. no attempted solicitation, but some have when solicitation fails to reach target (CA)

<--CANT ATTEMPT A NEG/RECK. CRIME-->
.
Mens Rea -- >
Grading->
<-Grading
Multiple Convictions->
<- Multiple Convictions
INTETIONALLY acts
with culpability
required for
substantive crime.
(ATTEMPT
COMPLICITY
GENERALLY NOT
POSSIBLE)

Punishment usually lower than
for actual crime

Blockburger test - some allow for
attempt + conspiracy (Verive)
inchoate + substantive.

Test: Does each crime require
proof of an additional fact which
the other doesn't?


Requires INTENT to commit
act.

Specic intent crimes
(BAFFLEPACK), not general
intent (e.g. Rape, but see
McQuirter)

Many CL JDX elevate
conduct, result and AC to
purpose (must INTEND age
of statutory rape victim)
different from MPC, allows
impossibility D.
Defenses
Common Law ATTEMPT
MPC
5.01(1) - with CULPABILITY REQUIRED FOR
SUBSTANTIVE CRIME:
a) PURPOSELY engages in conduct that would constitute
crime if ACs were as he believed
b) When RESULT is a material element (e.g. homicide) does
or OMITS to do anything PURPOSELY or believing that it
will cause result w/o further conduct on his part
c) PURPOSELY does or omits to do something which,
UNDER CIRCUMSTANCES AS HE BELIEVES, is a
substantial step.

5.01(3) - if conduct designed to aid another would establish
complicity under 2.06 if the crime were committed by such
other person is guilty of attempt even if crime is not
committed or attempted by other person. (ATTEMPT
COMPLICITY POSSIBLE)

2.06(4) - When result is an element, one can become
accomplice if one acts with kind of culpability with respect
to that result that is sufcient

PURPOSE /
UNDER CIRCUMSTANCES AS ACTOR
BELIEVES

Elevates -
Conduct: Purpose (complete)
Result: Purpose (completed); knowledge (inc.)
(CAN get att. murder for shooting platypus
thinking it's a person.)
Circumstances: Same as sub. offense (CAN be
guilty of statutory rape w/o knowing victim's
age.).

Defenses
Abandonment
Given to those we feel deserve
"moral credit". Requires
COMPLETE CHANGE OF
HEART, similar standards as
MPC

MOST CL JDX DON'T GRANT
HOWEVER
Renunciation 5.01(4): W/R/T
5.01(1)(b) + (c) attempts,
complete and voluntarily
abandoned effort to commit
crime OR otherwise prevented its
commission. DOES NOT SHIELD
ACCOMPLICE WHO DID NOT
JOIN IN RENUNCIATION
5.05(1) - Gets same grading as substantive crime unless 1st
degree (drops to 2nd)
5.05(2) - If conduct is so inerently unlikely to result or
culminate in a crime that neither actor nor conduct is a public
threat, court can mitigate or not charge entirely
221.1(3) - Can't convict of burglary + offense underlying it OR
for an attempt to commit underlying offense UNLESS
underlying offense is 1st/2nd degree Felony.
5.05(3) - Can't convict multiple inchoate crimes for same act
1.07(1)(a) - Can't be convicted of included offenses and
offense.
Included Crimes:
1.07(4)(b) - attempt/solicitation to offend + offense
1.07(4)(a) - Same/less evidence establishes proof
1.07(4)(c) - Offense differs only in that lesser injury occurred /
higher culp. than required for crime

5.01(2) - 1(c) Substantial step must be
STRONGLY corrobative of criminal
PUROSE. E.g.:
a) lying in wait, searching/following victim
b) enticing/seeking to entice victimto go to contemplated crime scene
c) reconnoitering place for crime
d) unlawful entry of structure, vehicle, or enclosure in which crime
will be committed
e) possession of materials specially designed for unlawful use/serve
no lawful purpose
f) possession, collection, fabrication of materials to be used in crime/
at crime scene where there is no lawful purpose
g) soliciting an innocent agent to engage in conduct constituting
element of crime

DETERMINING PREPATORY STEPS
vs.
ATTEMPTS STEPS
1. Last Step: Done everything needed, simply
fail
2. Dangerous Proximity: Greater the gravity +
probability + proximity of crime, stronger case
for calling it attempt (Mandujano)
3. Indispensable element: Has everything
under his control.
4. Probable Desistance ("but-for") interruption:
Would have happened BUT FOR intervening
action
5. Abnormal Step: Cross a boundary a law-
abiding citizen wouldn't
6. Unequivocality: Conduct manifests intent to
commit.
LEGAL IMPOSSIBILITY:
NG - Act is usually completed
and because of a missing
circumstance, act isn't illegal
(Pure: What you thought
actually not illegal v. Hybrid,
what you thought IS illegal and
you suck (mailed sugar thinking
it was yay), liable for attempt.

FACTUAL
IMPOSSIBILITY:
G - Act is usually incomplete
and is missing conduct or
result because of some fact
unknown to D

5.05(2) - Inherently
unlikely, defense or
mitigation.
IMPOSSIBILITY - 5.01(a)
Essentially erases impossibility
with phraseology of "how actor
believes them to be"

HOWEVER, if act truly
wouldn't be a crime, legal
impossibility might still apply.
Mistakes:
Of Law: Generally no excuse
Of Fact: Sometimes excuses

Mistake:
2.04(1) - MOF/L
a) Negatives MR
b) Defense if state of mind caused by
mistake is defense by law
2.04(2)- Not a D if D would be guilty of
another crime, might mitigate
2.04(3) - Belief that conduct isn't offense =
Defense when:
a) No notice/not reasonably accessible
b) Reasonable reliance of i) statute, judicial
decision iii) admin order, iv) ofcial
interpretation
Requirements -->
Determining Proximate Cause -->
Causation
Intervening Cause - Is
cause unforseeable? Does
it merely put victim in
dangerous circumstance
where crime occurs?
But For and
proximate cause.
Was it a necessary
condition?
Reasonably forseeable test
Defenses
Common Law
2.03(1) - Conduct causes result
when:
a) result would not have occurred
but for the conduct AND
b) relationship between conduct
and result satises other
requiremens by code or law
dening offense (Proximity, etc.)
MPC
2.03(2) - When purposely or knowingly causing a particular result is an element, the
element isn't established if actual result is not within the purpose or contemplation of the
actor unless:

! a) the actual result differs only in that a different person or property is injured
OR the damage is more serious/extensive than expected or:
! b) the actual result involved same kind of injury or harm that was planned and
isn't too remote or accidental in occurrence.
2.03(3) - When negligently or recklessly causing a particular result is an element, element
not established if actual result isn't within risk of which actor is aware or w/ negligence
should be aware unless: (see a+b above)

2.03(4) - When causing a particular result is a material element of an offense for which
absolute liability is imposed by law, the element is not established unless result is a
probable consequence of the actor's conduct.
Defense
s
D = Cause D = Not Cause
lf lnLervenlng cause
ls a reacuon Lo u,
no excuse, (unless
acuons are blzaree/
exLreme)
lnlcLs a blow LhaL lsn'L
morLal !"# %" buL sLarLs
chaln...(&'()*+,-, hosplLal
Lubes conLrasL w/ SLewarL
hosplLal fucks up hernla
aer sLabblng)
PosplLal slmple
negllgence = noL an
lnLervenlng cause.
(.'/*,#0 Wlfe's
spleen)
Intervening Cause 2.03(2) -
(3) - Purp./knowledge -
Actual result not within
purpose/knowledge of
actor.
Neg/Reckless:
-Actual result not risk
actor is aware/should be.
2.03(2)(a) or
(b)?

2.03(3)(a)
or (b)?

"#$%%$&' can be
cause lf Lhere ls
duLy by: SLaLuLe,
relauonshlp,
conLracL, help +
seculuslon
Omission is
failure to act
(1.13(4) - can be
cause only if there
is a duty to act
(2.01) (Substitute
for act only)