• Embed Doc
  • Copy Link
  • Readcast
  • Collections
  • CommentGo Back
 
The Actus reus for Attempt - Preparation vs. Attempt 
Case:
 
 People v. Murray
[pp. 670-671] Facts: Δ is charged with attempt to contract an incestuous marriage. He elopes with his niece, and requests oneof his witnesses to get magistrate to perform the ceremony.Holding: Court says although there's definitely an intent, you need more than this to show attempt. There's a big difference between preparation for the attempt and the attempt itself. The preparation consists in devising or arranging the means or measures necessary for the commission of the offense; the attempt is the directmovement toward the commission after the preparations are made. The attempt contemplated by the statutemust be manifested by acts which would end in the consummation of the particular offense, but for theintervention of circumstances independent of the will of the party.
 ____________________________ 
 
Notes
: [pp. 671-673] 
•
The preparation/attempt boundary - generally, the individual who has engaged only in "preparatoryactivity" is not criminally liable, while the individual who has gone "beyond mere preparation" may becharged with an attempt. So where do we draw the line between preparation and attempt? The MPCrejected these approaches:
o
The physical proximity doctrine
- the overt act required for an attempt must be proximate to thecompleted crime, or directly tending toward the completion of the crime, or must amount to thecommencement of the consummation.
o
The dangerous proximity doctrine
- the greater the gravity and probability of the offense, and thenearer the act to the crime, the stronger is the case for calling the act an attempt
o
The indispensable element test 
- a variation of the proximity test which emphasizes anyindispensable aspect of the criminal endeavor over which the actor has not yet acquired control
o
The probable desistance test 
- the conduct constitutes an attempt if, in the ordinary and naturalcourse of events, without interruption from an outside source, it will result in the crime intended
o
The abnormal step approach
- an attempt is a step toward crime which goes beyond the pointwhere the normal citizen would think better of his conduct and desist
o
The unequivocality test 
- an attempt is committed when the actor's conduct manifests an intent tocommit a crime
o
MPC - in addition to requiring criminal purpose, attempt would require an act that was asubstantial step in a course of conduct designed to accomplish a criminal result, and in order to be substantial such an act must strongly corroborate criminal purpose.
•
MPC § 5.01. Criminal Attempt
(1)Definition of Attempt. A person is guilty of an attempt to commit a crime if,acting with the kind of culpability otherwise required for commission of thecrime, he:
•
(c) purposely does or omits to do anything that, under the circumstances ashe believes them to be, is an act or omission constituting a substantial stepin a course of conduct planned to culminate in his commission of thecrime.
(2) Conduct That May be Held Substantial Step under Subsection (1)(c). Conductshall not be held to constitute a substantial step under subsection (1)(c) of thisSection unless it is strongly corroborative of the actor's criminal purpose. Withoutnegativing the sufficiency of other conduct, the following, if strongly
 
corroborative of the actor's criminal purpose, shall not be held insufficient as amatter of law:
•
(a) lying in wait, searching for or following the contemplated victim of thecrime;
•
(b) enticing or seeking to entice the contemplated victim of the crime to goto the place contemplated for its commission;
•
(c) reconnoitering the place contemplated for the commission of the crime;
•
(d) unlawful entry of a structure, vehicle or enclosure in which it iscontemplated that the crime will be committed;
•
(e) possession of materials to be employed in the commission of the crime,that are specially designed for such an unlawful use or which can serve nolawful purpose of the actor under the circumstances;
•
(f) possession, collection or fabrication of materials to be employed in thecommission of the crime, at or near the place contemplated for itscommission, where such possession, collection or fabrication serves nolawful purpose of the actor under the circumstances;
•
(g) soliciting an innocent agent to engage in conduct constituting anelement of the crime.
•
Unequivocality
o
According to the MPC, the object of the unequivocality approach is to subject to attempt liabilityconduct which unequivocally demonstrates that the actor is being guided by a criminal purpose.But how do we determine unequivocality? Some actions will appear unequivocally criminal thatmatch stereotypes of criminal behavior.
•
Both strength & weakness of the Unequivocality test that it links attempt liability to"community" alarm
Strength - it explains why attempts must proceed beyond mere preparation, evenwhere there is overwhelming evidence of criminal purpose.
•
We punish attempts not only because they manifest an intent to do harm, but also because they erode the public sense of security. So attempts aren'tentirely inchoate - they do cause some harm.
Weakness - the public alarm may be based on nothing more than prejudice 
 ____________________________ 
 
Class Notes
 
•
Δ trying to marry his niece. In preparation, he tries to get magistrate, he declares his intentions.
•
This is the most severe example of the stinginess the CL showed towards attempt.
•
Last step - Δ does not cross this line
•
We don’t prosecute ppl for intentions alone, but we do for attempters (the substantive offense), butwhere between these 2 points do we start punishing?Intentions only ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Substantive offense↑ here CL would want someone to be to punish for attempt (last step)↑ MPC goes further back onthis scale.
•
Different tests for attempt: (standard to hold liable for attempt gets more relaxed going down)
o
CL - "Last Step" Doctrine
o
CL - Physical proximity - how close Δ got to completed crime (similar to last step doctrine)
o
CL - Dangerous proximity - how probable the crime would occur 
of 00

Leave a Comment

You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...
You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...