Attempt
Encyclopedia
Attempt was originally an offence under the common law of England.
Attempt crimes are crime
s where the defendant
's actions have the form of the actual enaction of the crime itself: the actions must go beyond mere preparation.
The essence of the crime of attempt is that the defendant
has failed to commit the actus reus
(the Latin
term for the "guilty act") of the full offense, but has the direct and specific intent to commit that full offense. The normal rule for establishing criminal liability is to prove an actus reus accompanied by a mens rea
("guilty mind") at the relevant time (see concurrence
and strict liability
offenses as the exception to the rule).
to decide after having heard the judge
's instructions
regarding the law. The common law
precedent is used to distinguish between acts that were merely preparatory and those sufficiently proximate or connected to the crime. Anyone who is planning and executing a plan, will always go through a series of steps to arrive at the intended conclusion. Some aspects of the execution of the act will be too remote or removed from the full offense. Examples are watching the intended victim over a period of time to establish the routines and traveling to a store to buy necessary tools and equipment. But the closer to the reality of committing the offense the potential wrongdoer moves, the greater the social danger they become. This is a critical issue for the police
who need to know when they can intervene to avert the threatened harm by arrest
ing the person. This is a difficult policy area. On the one hand, the state wishes to be able to protect its citizens from harm. This requires an arrest at the earliest possible time. But, most states recognise a principle of individual liberty
that only those people who actually choose to break the law should be arrested. Since the potential wrongdoer could change their mind at any point before the crime is committed, the state should wait until the last possible minute to ensure that the intention is going to be realized.
England and Wales
In English law
, the test of proximity was:
So the defendant has reached that part of the series of acts, which if not interrupted, frustrated, or abandoned
, would inevitably result in the commission of the intended offence. But section 1(1) of the Criminal Attempts Act 1981
defines the actus reus as that is "...more than merely preparatory to the commission of the offence," that allowed liability to attach slightly earlier in the sequence of acts. Subsequent ratio decidendi
have abandoned the more formal common law last step test, leaving it to the jury to decide. A defendant who changes their mind after the act is sufficiently proximate, is still guilty of an attempt although the change of heart could be reflected in the sentencing
.
New York State
In New York
law, the element of actus reus is that the person engages in conduct that "...tends to effect the commission of such crime."
The test this requires either:
Model Penal Code
Under the Model Penal Code
, for a defendant to be convicted of attempt requires that they perform a "substantial step in a course of conduct planned to culminate in [the defendant']s commission of the crime" (MPC 5.01(1)(c)).
There is a distinction between "factual impossibility" and "legal impossibility". Factual impossibility is rarely a defense. A standard policing strategy is the use of an agent provocateur
to offer temptation to suspected criminals. In some countries, evidence
resulting from entrapment
is inadmissible. Nevertheless, undercover police officers do sell real or fake contraband such as illegal drugs or guns, as a means of exposing criminal activity. Some consider the use of fake material as a slightly safer way to catch criminals, rather than risk the real contraband falling into the wrong hands. But if there is no actual contraband and the actus reus of the full offense is "possession" of prohibited materials, there can be no criminal possession. Can there be an attempt to possess when, in the circumstances, it was impossible to follow through to commit the full offense
? The answer is that mistakes of fact are almost never a defense, as in People v. Lee Kong
, and State v. Mitchell
, for example.
England and Wales
Section 1(2) of the Criminal Attempts Act 1981
applies the Act even though the facts are such that the commission of the offence is impossible so long as, under section 1(3), the defendant believes that he is about to break the law and intends to commit the relevant full offence. This reverses the House of Lords
' decision in Haughton v Smith, which had held it to be a good defence if the intended crime was factually or legally incapable of fulfillment. This change in the law avoids any problem in an early arrest because, once in police custody, it is extraordinarily difficult to commit the full offence. Further, both the incompetent criminal who fails because the means adopted are inadequate (e.g. intends to poison a victim but the amount administered is harmless, or makes a false statement that does not deceive the intended victim) and the unlucky thief who find the pocket or purse empty, can now be convicted.
Recklessness is not a sufficient mens rea. That means that the defendant must have decided to bring about, so far as lay within their powers, the commission of the full offense. However, transferred intent
applies so that if "A" intends to murder "B" with a gun, but the shot accidentally misses and kills "C", then "A" is guilty of the murder of "C" and the attempted murder of "B". Alternatively, if "A" intends merely to frighten "B", and that same shot intentionally misses "B" but accidentally kills "C", "A" may be guilty of assaulting "B" (among other things), but not attempted murder, unless "A" intended that such fright would kill "B". Whether A would be guilty of murdering "C" would depend on the specific circumstances and what "A" foresaw. The punishment for an attempt is often tied to that of the intended offense (e.g., half the fine, or half the prison time).
Under English law, R v Walker and Hayles (1990) 90 Cr. App. R. 226 deals with the issue of the power of a court to impute
intention based on foresight. The defendants threw their victim from a third floor balcony and were charged with attempted murder. The judge directed the jury that they could infer intention if there was a high degree of probability that the victim would be killed and if the defendants knew "quite well that in doing that there was a high degree of probability" that the victim would be killed. The Court of Appeal did not accept that the reference to "very high degree of probability" was a misdirection, but Lloyd LJ. stated that in the rare cases where an expanded direction is required to include foresight, courts should use virtual certainty as the test, rather than high probability (see also R v Woollin [1998] 3 WLR 382 (HL)).
Recklessness will sometimes suffice for 'circumstances' of the crime. To be liable for attempted rape a defendant need not actually intend to have non-consensual intercourse, mere recklessness towards the lack of consent is enough (R v Khan). Likewise with attempted aggravated arson, recklessness towards loss of life will suffice (A-G's Reference #3 1992).
, a defendant is generally guilty of attempt in one of two situations: (1) when it was their purpose (i.e., conscious object) to engage in the conduct, or to cause the result, which constitutes the target offense, or (2) when they believe the result implicated in the target offense will occur, even if not their conscious object to cause that result (MPC §5.01(1)).
The "purpose" (as in situation 1) or "belief" (as in situation 2) required for an attempt do not necessarily encompass the attendant circumstances of the crime. Instead, the defendant must possess as to the attendant circumstances the degree of culpability required to commit the target offense, as specified in the elements of that offense.
s of conspiracy, or aiding, abetting, counseling or procuring an offense because the defendant would be too remote from the full offense. Similarly, there can be no attempt where the mens rea for the full offense is criminal negligence
since, by definition, there is insufficient intention to commit the full offense. Hence, there can be no charge of attempted involuntary manslaughter. It may, however, be possible to prove an attempted omission since all the preparatory steps are presumably commissive in building up to the situation in which the defendant will fail to act.
can also be a defense to either element (mens rea or actus reus) of attempt, if the defendant
"walks away" from the crime.
However, many jurisdictions do not recognize abandonment. Courts that do recognize this defense generally apply it only where the defendant completely and voluntarily renounces any criminal purpose (Understanding Criminal Law, J. Dressler, 2006). However, the abandonment is not complete and voluntary where the defendant desists from criminal efforts due to unexpected resistance (e.g., from victims), the discovery of the absence of an instrumentality needed for the completion of the offense, or other circumstances that increase the probability of arrest, or decrease the probability of successful completion of the crime (e.g. proximate arrival of police). Abandonment is also invalid where the defendant simply postpones the criminal plan until another time.
Under the Model Penal Code
, the defendant is not guilty of an attempt if they (1) abandon the effort to commit the crime or prevent the crime from being committed, and (2) their behavior manifests a complete and voluntary renunciation of the criminal purpose (MPC § 5.01(4)). However, the renunciation not complete if motivated in whole or part by one of the following:
Attempt crimes are crime
Crime
Crime is the breach of rules or laws for which some governing authority can ultimately prescribe a conviction...
s where the defendant
Defendant
A defendant or defender is any party who is required to answer the complaint of a plaintiff or pursuer in a civil lawsuit before a court, or any party who has been formally charged or accused of violating a criminal statute...
's actions have the form of the actual enaction of the crime itself: the actions must go beyond mere preparation.
The essence of the crime of attempt is that the defendant
Defendant
A defendant or defender is any party who is required to answer the complaint of a plaintiff or pursuer in a civil lawsuit before a court, or any party who has been formally charged or accused of violating a criminal statute...
has failed to commit the actus reus
Actus reus
Actus reus, sometimes called the external element or the objective element of a crime, is the Latin term for the "guilty act" which, when proved beyond a reasonable doubt in combination with the mens rea, "guilty mind", produces criminal liability in the common law-based criminal law jurisdictions...
(the Latin
Latin
Latin is an Italic language originally spoken in Latium and Ancient Rome. It, along with most European languages, is a descendant of the ancient Proto-Indo-European language. Although it is considered a dead language, a number of scholars and members of the Christian clergy speak it fluently, and...
term for the "guilty act") of the full offense, but has the direct and specific intent to commit that full offense. The normal rule for establishing criminal liability is to prove an actus reus accompanied by a mens rea
Mens rea
Mens rea is Latin for "guilty mind". In criminal law, it is viewed as one of the necessary elements of a crime. The standard common law test of criminal liability is usually expressed in the Latin phrase, actus non facit reum nisi mens sit rea, which means "the act does not make a person guilty...
("guilty mind") at the relevant time (see concurrence
Concurrence
In Western jurisprudence, concurrence is the apparent need to prove the simultaneous occurrence of both actus reus and mens rea , to constitute a crime; except in crimes of strict liability...
and strict liability
Strict liability
In law, strict liability is a standard for liability which may exist in either a criminal or civil context. A rule specifying strict liability makes a person legally responsible for the damage and loss caused by his or her acts and omissions regardless of culpability...
offenses as the exception to the rule).
The actus reus of attempted crime
Whether the actus reus of an attempt has occurred is a question of fact for the juryJury
A jury is a sworn body of people convened to render an impartial verdict officially submitted to them by a court, or to set a penalty or judgment. Modern juries tend to be found in courts to ascertain the guilt, or lack thereof, in a crime. In Anglophone jurisdictions, the verdict may be guilty,...
to decide after having heard the judge
Judge
A judge is a person who presides over court proceedings, either alone or as part of a panel of judges. The powers, functions, method of appointment, discipline, and training of judges vary widely across different jurisdictions. The judge is supposed to conduct the trial impartially and in an open...
's instructions
Jury instructions
Jury instructions are the set of legal rules that jurors should follow when the jury is deciding a civil or criminal case. Jury instructions are given to the jury by the jury instructor, who usually reads them aloud to the jury...
regarding the law. The common law
Common law
Common law is law developed by judges through decisions of courts and similar tribunals rather than through legislative statutes or executive branch action...
precedent is used to distinguish between acts that were merely preparatory and those sufficiently proximate or connected to the crime. Anyone who is planning and executing a plan, will always go through a series of steps to arrive at the intended conclusion. Some aspects of the execution of the act will be too remote or removed from the full offense. Examples are watching the intended victim over a period of time to establish the routines and traveling to a store to buy necessary tools and equipment. But the closer to the reality of committing the offense the potential wrongdoer moves, the greater the social danger they become. This is a critical issue for the police
Police
The police is a personification of the state designated to put in practice the enforced law, protect property and reduce civil disorder in civilian matters. Their powers include the legitimized use of force...
who need to know when they can intervene to avert the threatened harm by arrest
Arrest
An arrest is the act of depriving a person of his or her liberty usually in relation to the purported investigation and prevention of crime and presenting into the criminal justice system or harm to oneself or others...
ing the person. This is a difficult policy area. On the one hand, the state wishes to be able to protect its citizens from harm. This requires an arrest at the earliest possible time. But, most states recognise a principle of individual liberty
Liberty
Liberty is a moral and political principle, or Right, that identifies the condition in which human beings are able to govern themselves, to behave according to their own free will, and take responsibility for their actions...
that only those people who actually choose to break the law should be arrested. Since the potential wrongdoer could change their mind at any point before the crime is committed, the state should wait until the last possible minute to ensure that the intention is going to be realized.
England and Wales
In English law
English law
English law is the legal system of England and Wales, and is the basis of common law legal systems used in most Commonwealth countries and the United States except Louisiana...
, the test of proximity was:
- that the defendant must have "...crossed the rubicon, burnt his boats, or reached a point of no return".
So the defendant has reached that part of the series of acts, which if not interrupted, frustrated, or abandoned
Abandonment
The term abandonment has a multitude of uses, legal and extra-legal. This "signpost article" provides a guide to the various legal and quasi-legal uses of the word and includes links to articles that deal with each of the distinct concepts at greater length...
, would inevitably result in the commission of the intended offence. But section 1(1) of the Criminal Attempts Act 1981
Criminal Attempts Act 1981
The Criminal Attempts Act 1981 is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom. It applies to England and Wales and creates criminal offences pertaining to attempting to commit crimes...
defines the actus reus as that is "...more than merely preparatory to the commission of the offence," that allowed liability to attach slightly earlier in the sequence of acts. Subsequent ratio decidendi
Ratio decidendi
Ratio decidendi is a Latin phrase meaning "the reason" or "the rationale for the decision." The ratio decidendi is "[t]he point in a case which determines the judgment" or "the principle which the case establishes."...
have abandoned the more formal common law last step test, leaving it to the jury to decide. A defendant who changes their mind after the act is sufficiently proximate, is still guilty of an attempt although the change of heart could be reflected in the sentencing
Sentence (law)
In law, a sentence forms the final explicit act of a judge-ruled process, and also the symbolic principal act connected to his function. The sentence can generally involve a decree of imprisonment, a fine and/or other punishments against a defendant convicted of a crime...
.
New York State
In New York
New York
New York is a state in the Northeastern region of the United States. It is the nation's third most populous state. New York is bordered by New Jersey and Pennsylvania to the south, and by Connecticut, Massachusetts and Vermont to the east...
law, the element of actus reus is that the person engages in conduct that "...tends to effect the commission of such crime."
The test this requires either:
- An action that reveals a criminal intent, that is, res ipsa loquiturRes ipsa loquiturIn the common law of negligence, the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur states that the elements of duty of care and breach can be sometimes inferred from the very nature of an accident or other outcome, even without direct evidence of how any defendant behaved...
, or "the thing speaks for itself," or - The person has dangerous proximity, or is "dangerously near and close to the accomplishment of the crime."
Model Penal Code
Under the Model Penal Code
Model Penal Code
The Model Penal Code is a statutory text which was developed by the American Law Institute in 1962. The Chief Reporter on the project was Herbert Wechsler. The current form of the MPC was last updated in 1981. The purpose of the MPC was to stimulate and assist legislatures in making an effort to...
, for a defendant to be convicted of attempt requires that they perform a "substantial step in a course of conduct planned to culminate in [the defendant']s commission of the crime" (MPC 5.01(1)(c)).
The question of impossibility
- See People v. Lee KongPeople v. Lee KongPeople v. Lee Kong 95 Cal. 666, is a case in which the defendant claimed the "impossibility" defense to charges of assault, on the basis of a mistake in fact...
, , State v. MitchellState v. MitchellState v. Mitchell, 170 Mo. 633, 71 S.W. 175 , is a precedent-setting decision of the Supreme Court of Missouri which is part of the body of case law involving the prosecution of failed attempts to commit a crime...
, United States v. ThomasUnited States v. ThomasUnited States v. Thomas 13 U.S.C.M.A. 278 is a famous case of a military court-martial involving a failed attempt to commit a crime, in this case, rape and the use of the "impossibility" defense.-Circumstances:...
, James v. United States (2007)James v. United States (2007)James v. United States, 550 U.S. 192 , is a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States that held that attempted burglary could serve as a predicate felony under the federal Armed Career Criminal Act , which provided that a person convicted of being a felon in possession of a firearm with...
, Impossibility defenseImpossibility defenseAn Impossibility defense is a criminal defense occasionally used when a defendant is accused of a criminal attempt that failed only because the crime was factually or legally impossible to commit. Factual impossibility is rarely an adequate defense at common law. In the United States,...
There is a distinction between "factual impossibility" and "legal impossibility". Factual impossibility is rarely a defense. A standard policing strategy is the use of an agent provocateur
Agent provocateur
Traditionally, an agent provocateur is a person employed by the police or other entity to act undercover to entice or provoke another person to commit an illegal act...
to offer temptation to suspected criminals. In some countries, evidence
Evidence (law)
The law of evidence encompasses the rules and legal principles that govern the proof of facts in a legal proceeding. These rules determine what evidence can be considered by the trier of fact in reaching its decision and, sometimes, the weight that may be given to that evidence...
resulting from entrapment
Entrapment
In criminal law, entrapment is conduct by a law enforcement agent inducing a person to commit an offense that the person would otherwise have been unlikely to commit. In many jurisdictions, entrapment is a possible defense against criminal liability...
is inadmissible. Nevertheless, undercover police officers do sell real or fake contraband such as illegal drugs or guns, as a means of exposing criminal activity. Some consider the use of fake material as a slightly safer way to catch criminals, rather than risk the real contraband falling into the wrong hands. But if there is no actual contraband and the actus reus of the full offense is "possession" of prohibited materials, there can be no criminal possession. Can there be an attempt to possess when, in the circumstances, it was impossible to follow through to commit the full offense
Impossibility defense
An Impossibility defense is a criminal defense occasionally used when a defendant is accused of a criminal attempt that failed only because the crime was factually or legally impossible to commit. Factual impossibility is rarely an adequate defense at common law. In the United States,...
? The answer is that mistakes of fact are almost never a defense, as in People v. Lee Kong
People v. Lee Kong
People v. Lee Kong 95 Cal. 666, is a case in which the defendant claimed the "impossibility" defense to charges of assault, on the basis of a mistake in fact...
, and State v. Mitchell
State v. Mitchell
State v. Mitchell, 170 Mo. 633, 71 S.W. 175 , is a precedent-setting decision of the Supreme Court of Missouri which is part of the body of case law involving the prosecution of failed attempts to commit a crime...
, for example.
England and Wales
Section 1(2) of the Criminal Attempts Act 1981
Criminal Attempts Act 1981
The Criminal Attempts Act 1981 is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom. It applies to England and Wales and creates criminal offences pertaining to attempting to commit crimes...
applies the Act even though the facts are such that the commission of the offence is impossible so long as, under section 1(3), the defendant believes that he is about to break the law and intends to commit the relevant full offence. This reverses the House of Lords
House of Lords
The House of Lords is the upper house of the Parliament of the United Kingdom. Like the House of Commons, it meets in the Palace of Westminster....
' decision in Haughton v Smith, which had held it to be a good defence if the intended crime was factually or legally incapable of fulfillment. This change in the law avoids any problem in an early arrest because, once in police custody, it is extraordinarily difficult to commit the full offence. Further, both the incompetent criminal who fails because the means adopted are inadequate (e.g. intends to poison a victim but the amount administered is harmless, or makes a false statement that does not deceive the intended victim) and the unlucky thief who find the pocket or purse empty, can now be convicted.
The mens rea of attempted crime
Intent is the essence of attempt. Only a direct and specific intent will support a conviction.Recklessness is not a sufficient mens rea. That means that the defendant must have decided to bring about, so far as lay within their powers, the commission of the full offense. However, transferred intent
Transferred intent
Transferred intent describes the fact that intent can be transferred between victims, between torts, or both. In tort law, there are generally five areas in which transferred intent is applicable: battery, assault, false imprisonment, trespass to land, and trespass to chattels...
applies so that if "A" intends to murder "B" with a gun, but the shot accidentally misses and kills "C", then "A" is guilty of the murder of "C" and the attempted murder of "B". Alternatively, if "A" intends merely to frighten "B", and that same shot intentionally misses "B" but accidentally kills "C", "A" may be guilty of assaulting "B" (among other things), but not attempted murder, unless "A" intended that such fright would kill "B". Whether A would be guilty of murdering "C" would depend on the specific circumstances and what "A" foresaw. The punishment for an attempt is often tied to that of the intended offense (e.g., half the fine, or half the prison time).
Under English law, R v Walker and Hayles (1990) 90 Cr. App. R. 226 deals with the issue of the power of a court to impute
Imputation (law)
In law, the principle of imputation or attribution underpins the concept that ignorantia juris non excusat—ignorance of the law does not excuse. All laws are published and available for study in all developed states...
intention based on foresight. The defendants threw their victim from a third floor balcony and were charged with attempted murder. The judge directed the jury that they could infer intention if there was a high degree of probability that the victim would be killed and if the defendants knew "quite well that in doing that there was a high degree of probability" that the victim would be killed. The Court of Appeal did not accept that the reference to "very high degree of probability" was a misdirection, but Lloyd LJ. stated that in the rare cases where an expanded direction is required to include foresight, courts should use virtual certainty as the test, rather than high probability (see also R v Woollin [1998] 3 WLR 382 (HL)).
Recklessness will sometimes suffice for 'circumstances' of the crime. To be liable for attempted rape a defendant need not actually intend to have non-consensual intercourse, mere recklessness towards the lack of consent is enough (R v Khan). Likewise with attempted aggravated arson, recklessness towards loss of life will suffice (A-G's Reference #3 1992).
Model Penal Code
Under the Model Penal CodeModel Penal Code
The Model Penal Code is a statutory text which was developed by the American Law Institute in 1962. The Chief Reporter on the project was Herbert Wechsler. The current form of the MPC was last updated in 1981. The purpose of the MPC was to stimulate and assist legislatures in making an effort to...
, a defendant is generally guilty of attempt in one of two situations: (1) when it was their purpose (i.e., conscious object) to engage in the conduct, or to cause the result, which constitutes the target offense, or (2) when they believe the result implicated in the target offense will occur, even if not their conscious object to cause that result (MPC §5.01(1)).
The "purpose" (as in situation 1) or "belief" (as in situation 2) required for an attempt do not necessarily encompass the attendant circumstances of the crime. Instead, the defendant must possess as to the attendant circumstances the degree of culpability required to commit the target offense, as specified in the elements of that offense.
No attempt
It is not possible to attempt the other inchoate offenseInchoate offense
An inchoate offense, inchoate offence, or inchoate crime is the crime of preparing for or seeking to commit another crime. The most common example of an inchoate offense is conspiracy...
s of conspiracy, or aiding, abetting, counseling or procuring an offense because the defendant would be too remote from the full offense. Similarly, there can be no attempt where the mens rea for the full offense is criminal negligence
Criminal negligence
In the criminal law, criminal negligence is one of the three general classes of mens rea element required to constitute a conventional as opposed to strict liability offense. It is defined as an act that is:-Concept:...
since, by definition, there is insufficient intention to commit the full offense. Hence, there can be no charge of attempted involuntary manslaughter. It may, however, be possible to prove an attempted omission since all the preparatory steps are presumably commissive in building up to the situation in which the defendant will fail to act.
Abandonment
AbandonmentAbandonment
The term abandonment has a multitude of uses, legal and extra-legal. This "signpost article" provides a guide to the various legal and quasi-legal uses of the word and includes links to articles that deal with each of the distinct concepts at greater length...
can also be a defense to either element (mens rea or actus reus) of attempt, if the defendant
Defendant
A defendant or defender is any party who is required to answer the complaint of a plaintiff or pursuer in a civil lawsuit before a court, or any party who has been formally charged or accused of violating a criminal statute...
"walks away" from the crime.
However, many jurisdictions do not recognize abandonment. Courts that do recognize this defense generally apply it only where the defendant completely and voluntarily renounces any criminal purpose (Understanding Criminal Law, J. Dressler, 2006). However, the abandonment is not complete and voluntary where the defendant desists from criminal efforts due to unexpected resistance (e.g., from victims), the discovery of the absence of an instrumentality needed for the completion of the offense, or other circumstances that increase the probability of arrest, or decrease the probability of successful completion of the crime (e.g. proximate arrival of police). Abandonment is also invalid where the defendant simply postpones the criminal plan until another time.
Under the Model Penal Code
Model Penal Code
The Model Penal Code is a statutory text which was developed by the American Law Institute in 1962. The Chief Reporter on the project was Herbert Wechsler. The current form of the MPC was last updated in 1981. The purpose of the MPC was to stimulate and assist legislatures in making an effort to...
, the defendant is not guilty of an attempt if they (1) abandon the effort to commit the crime or prevent the crime from being committed, and (2) their behavior manifests a complete and voluntary renunciation of the criminal purpose (MPC § 5.01(4)). However, the renunciation not complete if motivated in whole or part by one of the following:
- They postpone the criminal conduct to a more advantageous time, or to transfer the criminal effort to another but similar objective or victim.
- They are merely reacting to circumstances that increase the probability of detection or apprehension.
- They are reacting to a change in circumstances that makes the crime harder to commit.
See also
- Criminal lawCriminal lawCriminal law, is the body of law that relates to crime. It might be defined as the body of rules that defines conduct that is not allowed because it is held to threaten, harm or endanger the safety and welfare of people, and that sets out the punishment to be imposed on people who do not obey...
- State v. MitchellState v. MitchellState v. Mitchell, 170 Mo. 633, 71 S.W. 175 , is a precedent-setting decision of the Supreme Court of Missouri which is part of the body of case law involving the prosecution of failed attempts to commit a crime...
- Impossibility defenseImpossibility defenseAn Impossibility defense is a criminal defense occasionally used when a defendant is accused of a criminal attempt that failed only because the crime was factually or legally impossible to commit. Factual impossibility is rarely an adequate defense at common law. In the United States,...
- ImpossibilityImpossibilityIn contract law, impossibility is an excuse for the nonperformance of duties under a contract, based on a change in circumstances , the nonoccurrence of which was an underlying assumption of the contract, that makes performance of the contract literally impossible...
in Contract law