Mens Rea  Intent to agree.  Intent to further, promote and cooperate in illegal activity.

Lauria – Proving Intent  Direct evidence  Indirect evidence –Special interest in the activity When the seller of legal goods for illegal use has a stake in the venture. When no legitimate use for the goods or services exists. When volume of sale is grossly disproportionate to any legitimate demand. – Aggravated Nature of the crime.

Taxpayer T and accountant A perpetrate a tax fraud in April, In January 1978, A bribes an IRS agent to overlook the problem and in June 1980, A bribes a second IRS agent. A and T are indicted for conspiracy in January If the applicable statute of limitations is three years, is the indictment timely?

Duration of a Conspiracy  Statute of limitations begins to run when the conspiracy terminates (not when the offense is committed),  Most courts have refused to infer that an implicit agreement to cover up the crime is inherent in every conspiracy,  Abandonment/Renunciation as a defense –“Affirmative action” required (e.g., reporting to police –MPC §5.03 – thwart success of conspiracy.

Consequences of a Conspiracy  Hearsay exception (Krulewitch)  Criminalizing noncriminal objectives  Punishment for conspiracy can exceed the level of punishment for the crime that is the object of the conspiracy  Punishment for conspiracy and for the object crime are separate and can be run consecutively  Conspiracy as a form of accessorial liability

Pinkerton  “So long as the partnership in crime continues, the partners act for each other in carrying it forward… “an overt act of one partner may be the act of all without any new agreement specifically directed to that act.””  The principal’s acts be in furtherance of the conspiracy and reasonably foreseeable as a necessary or natural consequence of the conspiracy.

Party LiablePinkertonComplicity (Dual Intent) A (for all crimes) B (for C’s robbery) C (for B’s robbery) D (for Bank 2) D (for Bank 1) B (for D’s theft) C (for D’s theft) Yes Yes, both in furtherance & foreseeable Yes Yes, if fore- seeable. Yes, intent to aid & actual aid No? Was there aid or intent to aid? No, no aid, no intent to aid. No, no aid, no intent to aid. Yes