Conspiracy mens rea was't defined clearly at common law, and most modern legislatures haven't made it any clearer. This leaves the courts to define it. The traditional definition of the inchoate crime of conspiracy includes the attendant circumstance element that agreements involve two or more parties agreeing or combining to commit a crime. Most modern statutes have replaced this traditional definition with a unilateral approach that doesn't require that all conspirators agree--or even know--the other conspirators.
Review the case of U.S. v. Garcia (CA9 1998), pages 281-283, and answer the following questions:
What acts did Garcia do that amounted to a conspiracy?
What was the government's evidence that supports the conspiracy?
What reasons did the Court give to reject the government's arguments and order that Garcia should go free?
This individual work should include the following:
An in-depth submission that should be free of spelling and grammar errors.
An essay containing a minimum of 300 words.
You will be assessed on the rationale you use in addressing the questions/issue posted, and how well you justify your argument regarding this issue.
Your response must be thought-provoking, have well developed ideas and/or opinions, and should reference any supporting material from the text, lecture or other sources you have used to complete the assignment.
You may use your text or the internet as a reference, but remember to cite your sources according to APA guidelines.
For citation guidelines, please refer to the table in the APA Style section of the syllabus.