Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
Facts: Δ rents a room above a bank vault, and starts prepping it in order to rob the bank. He went so far as to
drill holes in the floor too. The landlord saw this, and goes to the police. Δ said he had abandoned his attempt to
commit burglary before he was arrested. Δ sais that as time went on, he realized how absurd becoming a bank
robber was, and decided not to do it anymore. It wasn’t clear if Δ abandoned the crime before or after landlord
found the equipment.
Holding: Court holds that there was enough substantial evidence entitling a finding that the Δ's acts had gone
beyond mere preparation. Court says that the drilling was clearly an unequivocal and direct step toward the
completion of the burglary. Although it wasn’t clear as to when Δ abandoned it, it was reasonably inferred by
the trial judge that he abandoned it after the landlord found out - this is the equivalent of interception, and the Δ
involuntarily abandoned because he knew he got caught. Although the court would look at the reason for
abandonment - whether it was voluntary or involuntary - this is not controlling. Court says the relevant factor is
the determination of whether the acts of the perpetrator have reached such a stage of advancement that they can
be classified as an attempt. Once that attempt is found, there can be no exculpatory abandonment.
_______________________
_______________________
Class Notes
• Abandonment - didn’t complete substantive offense, because they voluntarily stopped - gave up their
criminal purpose. Does this matter?
• Landlord finds evidence and tells police. Δ says he abandoned - he changed his mind, he didn’t finish.
Prosecutor may have argued that it’s the landlord stopped it, that's why he stopped, not because he had a
change of heart.
o In this court - doesn’t make a difference.
• Sounds like they use the unequivocality test - similar to MPC
• In this jurisdiction, the court rejects any abandonment defense, once you're an attempter
(at CL, no abandonment defense). Once he crossed the line from preparation to attempt,
too late, already crossed the line.
• MPC § 5.01 (4) - renunciation defense
o Affirmative defense that he abandoned attempt to commit crime or otherwise prevented it to
happen
o This is an incentive to stop the commission of the crime.
o Has to be a true change of heart, can't be because circumstances make it difficult