1. Criminal Law for the Criminal Justice Professional
Norman M. Garland
Fourth Edition
Chapter 4
©McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. Authorized only for instructor use in the classroom.  No reproduction or further distribution permitted without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.

2. Chapter 4 Parties to a Crime
4.1 The role of the accomplice 4.2 Actus reus of accomplice liability 4.3 Mens rea of accomplice liability 4.4 Extent of accomplice liability 4.5 Relationship between the principal actor and the accomplice 4.6 Issues in accomplice liability
Chapter 4
Parties to a Crime

3. Chapter Objectives
Learn how an accomplice can aid and abet in a criminal activity Understand the difference between an accessory and a principal Know the difference between an affirmative act and an act of omission Explain how causation affects accomplice liability

4. Chapter Objectives (continued)
Understand the mens rea of accomplice liability Describe the natural and probable consequences doctrine Learn how justifications and excuses affect accomplice liability Explain the difference between accessorial and conspiratorial liability

5. 4.1 The Role of the Accomplice
Aid and abet
Accomplice
To assist or facilitate a person in accomplishing a crime
Someone who knowingly and willingly associates in the commission of a criminal offense and who intentionally assists another in the commission of a crime
Accomplice liability
The accountability of one individual for the criminal act or acts of another

6. Common Law Distinctions
Principal
Accessory
One who is present at and participates in the crime charged or who procures an innocent agent to commit the crime
One who aids in the commission of a crime without being present when the crime is committed

7. Principal in the First Degree
Usually the primary actor or perpetrator of the crime

8. Principal in the Second Degree
One who intentionally assists in the commission of a crime in his or her presence; such presence may be actual or constructive
Constructive presence
When an individual is within the vicinity of the crime and is able to assist the primary actor if necessary

9. Accessory before the Fact and Accessory after the Fact
One who intentionally counsels, solicits, or commands another in the commission of a crime
Accessory after the fact
One who intentionally aids another whom he or she knows has committed a felony, in order for the person assisted to avoid criminal prosecution and punishment

10. Figure 4.1: California Statute on the Definition of an Accomplice
30. CLASSIFICATION OF PARTIES TO CRIME. The parties to crimes are classified as: 1. Principals; and, 2. Accessories. 31. WHO ARE PRINCIPALS. All persons concerned in the commission of a crime, whether it be felony or misdemeanor, and whether they directly commit the act constituting the offense, or aid and abet in its commission, or, not being present, have advised and encouraged its commission, and all persons counseling, advising, or encouraging children under the age of fourteen years, or persons who are mentally incapacitated, to commit any crime, or who, by fraud, contrivance, or force, occasion the drunkenness of another for the purpose of causing him to commit any crime, or who, by threats, menaces, command, or coercion, compel another to commit any crime, are principals in any crime so committed. It is the intent of the Legislature, in enacting this act, not to adversely affect decisional case law that has previously interpreted, or used, the terms “idiot,” “imbecility,” or “lunatic,” or any variation thereof. 32. ACCESSORIES DEFINED. Every person who, after a felony has been committed, harbors, conceals or aids a principal in such felony, with the intent that said principal may avoid or escape from arrest, trial, conviction or punishment, having knowledge that said principal has committed such felony or has been charged with such felony or convicted thereof, is an accessory to such felony. 33. ACCESSORIES: PUNISHMENT. Except in cases where a different punishment is prescribed, an accessory is punishable by a fine not exceeding five thousand dollars ($5,000), or by imprisonment in the state prison, or in a county jail not exceeding one year, or by both such fine and imprisonment.
SOURCE: Cal. Penal Code §§ 30–33 (West 2010).

11. Modern Parties to a Crime
Common law created a separate category of parties—aiders and abettors
Allowed judges to distinguish among felons and punish accessories less severely than principals
Under modern law, principals, aiders, abettors, and accessories are prosecuted as principals

12. 4.2 Actus Reus of Accomplice Liability
Act that contributes to commission of a crime is required for accomplice liability
Contribution may arise either through some affirmative act or by an omission
Affirmative acts
May be either physical assistance or psychological influence
Any kind of aid made toward commission of an offense establishes accomplice liability

13. Acts of Omission
Act of omission must be accompanied with the intent to facilitate the actor in accomplishing the crime
Model Penal Code (MPC) requires a person to act with the purpose of promoting or facilitating a crime in order to be held liable as an accomplice by an act of omission
Mere knowledge of a criminal act and failure to stop the crime is not enough

14. Accountability
MPC provides that a person is an accomplice if he or she:
Solicits another to commit a crime
“Aids or agrees or attempts to aid such other person in planning or committing” a crime
Has a legal duty to prevent commission of a crime, but “fails to make proper effort to do so”

15. Application Case
4.1 People v. Stanciel

16. 4.3 Mens Rea of Accomplice Liability
Person is an accomplice only if he or she:
Aids or assists another in the commission of a crime
Possesses the intent to support or encourage the commission of the crime
Intends that the primary party commit the underlying offense

17. Purpose and Knowledge
MPC distinguishes between purpose and knowledge for accomplice liability
Purpose - Mental state of intent makes one liable
Mere knowledge that one’s act may facilitate a crime does not necessarily establish accomplice liability
Criminal facilitation
When an individual knowingly aids another, but does not truly have a separate intent to aid in the commission of the underlying offense

18. Agents Provocateur and Entrapment
Agent provocateur
Entrapment
Someone who intends for the principal to fail in his or her illegal venture and, because of this lack of causation, is not an accomplice
When officers or agents of the government, for the purpose of instituting a criminal prosecution against a person, induce an otherwise innocent person to commit a crime that he or she had not contemplated
Ignorance of law is not accepted as an excuse for accomplice liability

19. Figure 4.2: Kentucky Statute on Entrapment
Entrapment (1) A person is not guilty of an offense arising out of proscribed conduct when: (a) he was induced or encouraged to engage in that conduct by a public servant seeking to obtain evidence against him for the purpose of criminal prosecution; and (b) at the time of the inducement or encouragement, he was not otherwise disposed to engage in such conduct. (2) The relief afforded by subsection (1) is unavailable when: (a) the public servant or the person acting in cooperation with a public servant merely affords the defendant an opportunity to commit an offense; or (b) the offense charged has physical injury or the threat of physical injury as one (1) of its elements and the prosecution is based on conduct causing or threatening such injury to a person other than the person perpetrating the entrapment. (3) The relief provided a defendant by subsection (1) is a defense. .
SOURCE: Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § (West 2010).

20. Application Cases
4.2 State v. Gladstone 4.3 Wilson v. People 4.4 United States v. Twigg

21. 4.4 Extent of Accomplice Liability
Extent of liability attributed to accomplice is an important factor
Natural and probable consequences doctrine
A doctrine that holds an accomplice liable not only for the offense he or she intended to facilitate or encourage, but also for any natural and foreseeable additional offenses committed by the principal to whom he or she is an accomplice

22. Natural and Foreseeable Consequences
Any additional criminal act necessary to accomplish the criminal goal will be considered a natural and foreseeable consequence MPC does not extend accomplice liability to crimes that were not agreed to, or to crimes the accomplice did not aid or intend

23. Negligent Acts
Liability as an accomplice can extend to negligent and reckless conduct on the part of the primary actor
Some jurisdictions refuse to extend accomplice liability to those who encourage negligent or reckless behavior

24. Application Cases (continued 1)
4.5 People v. Luparello 4.6 Riley v. State

25. 4.5 Relationship between Principal Actor and Accomplice
Innocent agent or instrumentality
An object, animal, or person who cannot be culpable under the law, such as an insane person or a child that is used by a principal to commit a crime

26. 4.5 Relationship between Principal Actor and Accomplice (continued 1)
Sometimes the doctrine of innocent instrumentality is difficult to apply
When a statute applies to only a certain class of people by definition
When the crime can be performed only by the person himself or herself and not through an agent
Nonproxyable offense
A crime that can be committed only through the actor’s own conduct and cannot be committed by an agent

27. 4.5 Relationship between Principal Actor and Accomplice (continued 2)
Courts aim to punish the perpetrator who possesses the intent to accomplish the crime

28. 4.5 Feigning Primary Party
Converse of agent provocateur
Individual steps each person took in committing the crime is critical in determining whether an accomplice is criminally culpable
Entrapment defense is available only when the conduct in question concerns a law enforcement officer or an agent of a law enforcement officer

29. 4.5 When the Principal Actor Is Acquitted
At common law, an accomplice could not be convicted of a crime unless the primary actor was convicted
Various jurisdictions created statutes enabling prosecution of individuals for aiding and abetting the commission of a crime as long as it could be proven that a crime was committed
Acquittal of the principal because of an excuse defense does not morally excuse a criminal action

30. Application Cases (continued 2)
4.7 United States v. Walser 4.8 Vaden v. State 4.9 People v. Eberhardt

31. 4.6 Issues in Accomplice Liability
Limitations of and defenses to complicity: Abandonment Accomplice liability versus conspiracy: The Pinkerton doctrine How far should accomplice liability reach?

32. Limitations of and Defenses to Complicity: Abandonment
To end liability as an accomplice, aider and abettor must abandon the agreement MPC stipulates termination of complicity must be made prior to commission of the crime

33. Accomplice Liability versus Conspiracy: The Pinkerton Doctrine
A conspiracy can exist with a single criminal act as its goal
Conspiracy
A partnership in crime, defined as an agreement between two or more people to achieve a criminal purpose or to achieve a lawful purpose using unlawful means. Also called a common criminal enterprise

34. Accomplice Liability versus Conspiracy: The Pinkerton Doctrine (continued 1)
Criminal liability based on a conspiracy theory differs from accomplice liability
Agency theory
The theory that all conspirators act as the agents of (and represent) their co-conspirators involved in a criminal scheme and are liable for all criminal acts committed by any of their co-conspirators

35. Accomplice Liability versus Conspiracy: The Pinkerton Doctrine (continued 2)
Accomplice liability can derive from encouragement, assistance, or sometimes mere knowledge MPC rejects extended liability imposed by the Pinkerton doctrine
Pinkerton doctrine
Doctrine that holds a person associated with a conspiracy responsible for any criminal act committed by a co- conspirator if the act is within the scope of the conspiracy and is a foreseeable result of the criminal scheme

36. How Far Should Accomplice Liability Reach?
Criminal liability for actions of another raises important public policy questions
If an individual can be liable for assisting in some small way in criminal conduct, what type of liability should be imposed on an industry that sell prescription drugs or firearms?

37. Application Case (continued 3)
4.10 Pinkerton v. United States