Criminal Law · Conspiracy

What Are The Defenses To Conspiracy in Criminal Law?

Clear answer to: What Are The Defenses To Conspiracy in Criminal Law? with key cases, examples, and exam tips for law students.

Short Answer

Defenses to conspiracy include lack of an agreement, withdrawal from the conspiracy, and incapacity of co-conspirators. Additionally, some jurisdictions recognize the defense of impossibility, either factual or legal.

Detailed Answer

In conspiracy law, a common defense is the argument that there was no actual agreement among the alleged co-conspirators to commit the crime, which is a fundamental requirement for conspiracy charges. If one party did not consent to the conspiracy, or if the alleged agreement was merely vague or tentative, the prosecution may struggle to meet the burden of proof.

Another important defense is withdrawal from the conspiracy. If a defendant can prove that they withdrew from the conspiracy before the commission of the crime and sufficiently communicated this withdrawal to the other co-conspirators, it can serve as a complete defense to conspiracy charges. This must usually be done in a clear manner, demonstrating the defendant's intent to not participate further in the conspiracy.

In some jurisdictions, the defense of impossibility may apply. Factual impossibility refers to situations where the crime cannot be committed as planned due to circumstances unknown to the defendant, while legal impossibility exists when the planned acts do not constitute a crime. Both defenses can challenge the validity of conspiracy charges, particularly if the defendant believed they were participating in a conspiracy that was inherently impossible.

Additionally, the capacity of the co-conspirators can also serve as a defense. If all co-conspirators lack the legal capacity to commit the criminal act (for example, due to age or mental incapacity), it can undermine the conspiracy charge against one or more participants, even if they were unaware of the incapacity at the time.

Key Cases
  • 1Pinkerton v. United States (1946) - clarified liability for co-conspirators
  • 2United States v. Jimenez (1993) - addressed withdrawal from conspiracy
  • 3People v. Bowman (1933) - explored impossibility as a defense
  • 4Klein v. United States (1950) - discussed the requirement of an actual agreement
Practical Example

Suppose three friends, A, B, and C, discuss robbing a bank. If A decides not to go through with it, informs B and C that he is withdrawing from the plan before any actions are taken, A can assert withdrawal as a defense if charged, provided he effectively communicated his decision and took steps to thwart the robbery.

Exam Relevance

Exam questions may require students to identify defenses to conspiracy based on hypothetical facts, focusing on the nuances of withdrawal, agreement, and impossibility. Being able to articulate these defenses in relation to case law is essential.

Get Answers to All Your Legal Questions

Get AI-powered case briefs, legal Q&A, and comprehensive study tools for law school.