In a jurisdiction that follows the common-law rule that a conspiracy is complete upon an agreement (no overt-act requirement), a man and another individual agree to break into a warehouse at night and steal electronics. After they reach this agreement, neither of them takes any further steps toward committing the burglary. Which inchoate offense has the man committed under this jurisdiction's rule?
The offense is conspiracy. At common law, conspiracy is complete as soon as two or more people knowingly agree to commit an unlawful act with the intent that it be carried out; no overt act is required. Solicitation is incorrect because the man did not merely ask another to commit the crime-both parties agreed. Attempt is incorrect because no substantial step toward the burglary occurred. Aiding and abetting is not an inchoate offense and, in any event, requires that the principal commit or attempt the substantive crime, which has not happened here.
Ask Bash
Bash is our AI bot, trained to help you pass your exam. AI Generated Content may display inaccurate information, always double-check anything important.
What are the key elements required to prove conspiracy?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
How does solicitation differ from conspiracy?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
What factors can lead to a prosecution for conspiracy even without an overt act?