Can you attempt a conspiracy

Will all the solicitations merge with the murder? When we think about merger we generally think about the people solicited committing the crimes that they were solicited to commit. The hypothetical here is different in a way that it strikes me as better to analyze this as murder by A rather than merger.

The following question was asked in the comments of the blog: Does solicitation merge with attempt?

If the person solicited attempts the crime, then both the solicitor and the one solicited can be found guilty of attempt.

Is the person solicited liable for solicitation if he agrees to do it? Or once the person asked agrees, are they both liable for conspiracy and not solicitation, because solicitation merges with conspiracy? Answer: Let's take this question one point at a time: Does solicitation merge with attempt?

Let's assume that A solicits B to commit a murder, and though B does not complete the crime, he fulfills the elements of attempted murder. Solicitation merges with attempted murder and both A and B can be found liable for attempted murder. The solicitor, could not, however, be punished for both the solicitation and attempt due to the doctrine of merger.

An attempt merges into the completed crime. For example, a person cannot be convicted of both attempted burglary and burglary based on the same episode. A person can, however, be charged with, and convicted of, one substantive crime and an attempt to commit another.

A person who solicits another to commit a criminal offense, and in the course of such solicitation commands, encourages, hires, or requests another person to engage in specific conduct which would constitute such offense, or an attempt to commit such offense, commits the crime of solicitation.

To prove the crime of solicitation, the state must prove the following two elements beyond a reasonable doubt: 1 the defendant solicited another to commit a crime; and 2 during the solicitation, the defendant commanded, encouraged, hired, or requested another to engage in specific conduct which would constitute the commission of the crime or an attempt to commit the crime.

It is a defense to the charge of solicitation if the defendant, after soliciting another to commit the crime, persuaded that other person not to do so, or otherwise prevented commission of the offense.

Like attempt, the crime of solicitation is ranked one degree and one offense level lower than the underlying or completed crime for purposes of sentencing in Florida.

If the person solicited agrees to commit the crime, then a conspiracy has been formed and the crime of solicitation merges into conspiracy. A person who agrees, conspires, combines, or confederates with another person or persons to commit any offense commits the offense of criminal conspiracy. To prove the crime of criminal conspiracy, the state must prove the following two elements beyond a reasonable doubt: 1 the intent of the defendant was that the underlying or completed crime be committed; and 2 in order to carry out the intent, the defendant agreed, conspired, combined, or confederated with another person or persons to cause the underlying crime to be committed either by them, one of them, or by some other person.

In Florida, it is not necessary that the defendant do some act in furtherance of the offense conspired. It is a defense to the charge of criminal conspiracy that the defendant, after conspiring with one or more persons to commit the completed crime, persuaded the other person pr persons not to do so, or otherwise prevented the commission of the completed crime.

Like the other two inchoate crimes, the crime of conspiracy is ranked one degree and one offense level lower than the completed crime. Conspiracy does not merge with the completed crime. A person can, therefore, be convicted of both conspiracy to commit murder and murder, based on the same episode. In Florida, you do not have to complete a criminal act to be prosecuted.

Simply agreeing to commit a crime, persuading someone else to do it, or taking a shot at it yourself may be enough to get you there.

While the inchoate crimes are not as severe as their underlying or completed counterparts, they can still result in some very hefty sentences. Second, all conspirators must have the specific intent to commit the objective of the conspiracy.

This means that someone who is entirely unaware that she is participating in a crime cannot be charged with conspiracy. For instance, if two sisters agree to rob a bank and ask their brother to drive them to the bank without informing him of their intent to commit a crime, he cannot be charged with conspiring in the robbery.

This specific intent requirement does not require that each individual knows all the details of the crime or all of the members of the conspiracy.

As long as an individual understands that the act being planned is a criminal one and proceeds nonetheless, he can be charged with conspiracy. This overt act does not have to be the crime itself, nor does it have to be an act that is illegal.

Rather, the act must merely be a step taken in furtherance of the criminal objective, such as buying a weapon or holding a meeting to plan an attack. The act must also take place after the group of individuals has agreed to conspire.

Actions taken before the agreement do not fulfill this requirement. Like other inchoate crimes such as attempt , a defendant charged with conspiracy can raise the defense of abandonment or withdrawal. In order to do so, a defendant must show that he affirmatively communicated his withdrawal to his co-conspirators and took some positive action to withdraw from the conspiracy.

Additionally, the defendant must have withdrawn from the conspiracy prior to its completion. Importantly, the defendant must have definitively cut ties with his fellow co-conspirators. If he continues to communicate with them or assist them in any way, this may prevent him from raising the defense of withdrawal. Another defense available in conspiracy cases is the defense of entrapment. Entrapment means that the defendant was persuaded to participate in the conspiracy by a law enforcement officer or government agent and that he or she would not otherwise have become involved in the conspiracy.

Specifically, the defendant must show that 1 the idea for the conspiracy came from an officer and not the defendant; 2 the defendant was persuaded to participate in the conspiracy by an officer and 3 before being persuaded, the defendant had no intention of committing the crime. Conspirators may also be convicted for the crimes of co-conspirators. For example, Willa, Wesley, and Walter conspire to each rob a jewelry store on the same day and divide the stolen goods equally.

As he is robbing the store, Walter shoots the store owner. Both federal law and state law define the crime of conspiracy.