MBE Criminal Law: Accomplice Liability

An overview of accomplice liability and its rules as tested on the bar exam, including key concepts and practice questions.

Overview

Accomplice liability is a crucial concept in criminal law that holds individuals accountable for the actions of others when they assist or encourage the commission of a crime. Under the Model Penal Code, an accomplice is someone who intentionally aids or encourages another in the commission of an offense and is typically held liable for the same crime committed by the principal. This doctrine also applies to lesser-included offenses and can sometimes extend to certain unplanned acts that were foreseeable as a consequence of the criminal endeavor.

When analyzing accomplice liability, it is essential to assess the level of intent required, the type of conduct that qualifies as assistance (e.g., providing tools, acting as a lookout), and whether the accomplice had knowledge of the principal's target. It is also important to understand the defenses available to alleged accomplices, such as withdrawal and the lack of intent to promote or facilitate the crime. Typically, MBE questions will require students to discern the roles of different actors in a criminal event and apply the rules to specific factual scenarios.

Key Rules

An accomplice must have the intent to assist the principal in committing the crime.
Accomplice liability extends to all natural and probable consequences of the crime that the accomplice helped to facilitate.
Providing assistance or encouragement can be done through actions or omissions.
A mere presence at the scene of a crime, without further involvement, is insufficient to establish accomplice liability.
Defenses to accomplice liability include withdrawal from the crime and lack of intent.

Common Question Patterns

Identify the accomplice based on their level of involvement in the crime.
Determine if an accomplice can be charged with the same crime as the principal.
Assess the validity of defenses available to purported accomplices.

Practice Questions

1. A and B decide to rob a bank. A goes into the bank to commit the robbery while B waits outside in the getaway car. After A successfully robs the bank, he runs outside, and both A and B drive away. Could B be charged as an accomplice to the robbery?

A. A) No, because B did not enter the bank.

B. B) Yes, because B aided in the commission of the robbery by being ready to flee.(Correct)

C. C) No, because B was not aware of A's plan to rob the bank.

D. D) Yes, but only if B had a prior criminal record.

Explanation: B can be charged as an accomplice because he provided assistance by waiting in the getaway car, which shows intent to facilitate A's commission of the robbery.

2. C encourages D to commit a burglary by providing him with tools and information about the location. D ultimately commits the burglary but does so differently than C expected. Can C be held liable as an accomplice?

A. A) No, because D committed the burglary in a different manner than was discussed.

B. B) Yes, for the overall crime of burglary regardless of the specifics of execution.(Correct)

C. C) No, because C must control every detail of the crime to be liable.

D. D) Yes, but only for an attempt of burglary.

Explanation: C can be held liable for the crime of burglary because he provided substantial assistance and had the intent to promote the crime, even if the execution differed.

3. E is aware that F and G are planning to kidnap a wealthy individual. Although E does not participate, he provides them with a map of the area. F and G are apprehended and charged with kidnapping. Can E be charged as an accomplice?

A. A) No, because E was not present during the kidnapping.

B. B) Yes, because E provided material support by giving the map.(Correct)

C. C) No, because E had no intent to commit the crime.

D. D) Yes, but only if he receives something in return for the map.

Explanation: E can be charged as an accomplice because he provided assistance that was essential to the crime, demonstrating his intent to support the kidnapping.

4. H was hanging out with I when I suggested robbing a store. H was apprehensive and did not actively engage but did not tell I to stop. I commits the robbery. Can H be liable as an accomplice?

A. A) Yes, for failing to dissuade I from committing the crime.

B. B) No, because H did not actively participate.

C. C) Yes, if H's presence encouraged I's actions.(Correct)

D. D) No, because H's emotional stance was against the robbery.

Explanation: H can be held liable as an accomplice if his presence encouraged I to commit the robbery, since mere acquiescence can be enough if it conveys support.

5. J walks into a bar and sees K about to fight L. J yells at K to 'teach L a lesson' but does not physically intervene. L is injured in the fight. Can J be charged as an accomplice?

A. A) Yes, J encouraged K to commit a violent act.(Correct)

B. B) No, because verbal encouragement is not sufficient for liability.

C. C) Yes, but only if J had a prior relationship with K.

D. D) No, unless J actively participated in the fight.

Explanation: J can be charged as an accomplice because verbal encouragement to commit a crime, combined with the context of the fight, establishes the requisite intent.

Test-Taking Tips

Focus on the intention behind the actions of each party involved.
Distinguish between passive presence and active encouragement.
Pay careful attention to details in hypothetical facts, as they can significantly affect outcomes.
Remember that defenses to accomplice liability can depend on withdrawal timing and effectiveness.
Practice scenario-based questions to familiarize yourself with applying the legal standards.

Master MBE Topics with Briefly

Get AI-powered study tools, practice questions, and comprehensive legal resources.