California First-Year Law Students' Exam (Baby Bar) — MCCriminal LawEasy
A client, a former special forces operative, is approached by a criminal organization to plan and execute a major bank heist. He agrees, and over several weeks, meets with other members of the organization to meticulously plan the operation, including detailed escape routes and equipment lists. Before any overt act of theft occurs, the client has fulfilled which element of conspiracy?
- AOvert act
- BAgreement
- CCompletion of the target crime
- DWithdrawal
Show answer & explanationAnswer & explanation
Correct answer: B. Agreement
The core of conspiracy under common law is the agreement between two or more people to commit an unlawful act. The client's agreement to plan and execute the heist, followed by meetings for detailed planning, clearly establishes this element. An overt act is often required by statute but not always at common law, and withdrawal and completion are not elements of forming a conspiracy.
Why the other options are wrong
- A. An overt act is often a statutory requirement for conspiracy, but the agreement itself is the foundational common law element.
- C. Conspiracy is an inchoate crime; the target crime does not need to be completed for conspiracy to exist.
- D. Withdrawal is a defense to conspiracy, not an element of its formation.
Conspiracy (Common Law)
An agreement between two or more persons to commit an unlawful act or a lawful act by unlawful means.
- Requires an agreement between at least two parties.
- Requires specific intent to enter the agreement and to achieve the unlawful objective.
- At common law, no overt act is required (many statutes add this requirement).
Memory trick: Crimes unripened, intent's first step.