United States v. MacDonald & Watson Waste Oil Co

Brief Fact Summary. The Defendants, MacDonald & Watson Waste Oil Co. and several of its officers including its president (Defendants), were convicted of violating the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (the Act) in his role as president of business operating a waste disposal facility where hazardous waste had unlawfully been dumped.

Synopsis of Rule of Law. A defendant, as president of company operating a waste disposal facility, cannot be held criminally liable for unlawful dumping of hazardous waste without evidence that the defendant had actual knowledge of the unlawful dumping, as required by the statute.
Continue reading “United States v. MacDonald & Watson Waste Oil Co”

United States v. Hilton Hotels Corp.

Brief Fact Summary. The Defendant, Hilton Hotels Corp. (Defendant), was involved in an association in Portland that collectively agreed to give preferential treatment to suppliers who contributed money to the association. Though it was against corporate policy for the Defendant corporation to be involved in such a scheme, a purchasing agent for the corporation threatened a loss of business to suppliers if they did not contribute to the association.

Synopsis of Rule of Law. A corporation is criminally liable for the acts of its agents in the scope of their employment, even where agents have acted against the express policy of the corporation.
Continue reading “United States v. Hilton Hotels Corp.”

Commonwealth v. Beneficial Finance Co

Brief Fact Summary. The Defendant, Beneficial Finance Co. (Defendant), was convicted of bribing state banking officials in order to get preferential treatment from the Small Loans Regulatory Board, a state agency. The Defendant’s conviction was based upon acts taken by employees of the corporation who were neither officers nor directors within the corporation.

Synopsis of Rule of Law. A corporation is criminally responsible for the unlawful actions of its employees acting within the scope of their authority in the particular business transaction determined to be illegal.
Continue reading “Commonwealth v. Beneficial Finance Co”

Wilcox v. Jeffery

View this case and other resources at:
Bloomberg Law

Brief Fact Summary. The Defendant was convicted of aiding and abetting a foreigner’s crime of taking employment during his stay in Britain – to wit, playing saxophone at a music hall – contrary to a government ordinance respecting aliens.

Synopsis of Rule of Law. The Defendant aided and abetted a visiting musician in contravening a government ordinance against aliens taking up employment when he encouraged musicians unlawfulness by purchasing a ticket to his performance and using the performance as copy for his for-profit arts publication.
Continue reading “Wilcox v. Jeffery”

State v. Hayes

Citation

View this case and other resources at:
Bloomberg Law

Brief Fact Summary. The Defendant, Hayes (Defendant), was convicted of burglarizing a general store. The Defendant’s accomplice in the burglary, a relative of the store owners, only participated so that the Defendant could be caught in the act and had no actual intent to rob the store.

Synopsis of Rule of Law. The actions of one accomplice cannot be imputed, for purposes of criminal liability, to another accomplice if the original accomplice is merely feigning cooperation and lacks the requisite intent to commit a crime.
Continue reading “State v. Hayes”

People v. Russel

Citation

View this case and other resources at:
Bloomberg Law

Brief Fact Summary. Three Defendants, Russel and two others (Defendants), who engaged in outdoor gun battle that resulted in the death of a passer-by, were all charged with murdering that individual, despite the fact that only one of the Defendant’s had fired the bullet that hit the passer-by.

Synopsis of Rule of Law. Three defendants may be charged for the murder committed by only one of them where there is evidence that each defendant “intentionally aided” the defendant who actually fired the fatal bullet.
Continue reading “People v. Russel”

United States v. Xavier

Citation

View this case and other resources at:
Bloomberg Law

Brief Fact Summary. The Defendant, Xavier (Defendant), procured a firearm for his brother, a convicted felon and as a result was convicted of aiding and abetting an ex-felon’s possession of a firearm, a crime under federal law. Because Defendant’s brother was an ex-convict, Defendant violated federal gun laws by procuring a firearm for him.

Synopsis of Rule of Law. Unless a defendant has knowledge or cause to believe that the individual for whom he has procured a firearm is an ex-felon, he cannot be held criminally responsible under Section:922(d) for aiding and abetting an ex-felon in the possession of a firearm.
Continue reading “United States v. Xavier”

State v. McVay

Brief Fact Summary. The Defendant, McVay (Defendant), was charged as accessory before the fact in a larger manslaughter prosecution arising out of an explosion that occurred on a Newport-bound steamer which killed several passengers.

Synopsis of Rule of Law. A defendant may be charged as accessory before the fact even in manslaughter crimes where the resulting harm is not intentional.
Continue reading “State v. McVay”

State v. Gladstone

Brief Fact Summary. The Defendant, Gladstone (Defendant), who offered the name and address of local drug dealer to a prospective buyer, was convicted of aiding and abetting another individual in the unlawful sale of marijuana.

Synopsis of Rule of Law. In order to be convicted of having aided and abetted a criminal offense, it must be shown that defendant did something in association or connection with the principal offender to accomplish the crime.
Continue reading “State v. Gladstone”

People v. Luparello

Brief Fact Summary. A friend who the Defendant, Luparello (Defendant), sent to victim’s house to elicit information as to his former lover’s whereabouts shot and killed the victim when he refused to divulge the requested information. Defendant was charged with murder as an accomplice, though he was not present at the murder scene.

Synopsis of Rule of Law. An accomplice is criminally responsible for the actual crime committed, rather than merely the intended crime.
Continue reading “People v. Luparello”

People v. Dlugash

Brief Fact Summary. The Defendant, Dlugash (Defendant), was convicted of murder. He challenged the conviction on the basis that the victim was already deceased when Defendant fired a round of bullets at his head.

Synopsis of Rule of Law. A person can be convicted of attempting to commit a crime even though, if effected, it would not actually constitute a criminal offense.
Continue reading “People v. Dlugash”

Hicks v. United States

Brief Fact Summary. The Defendant, Hicks (Defendant), was jointly indicted with another man on one count of murder. Defendant had been present when his companion (co-defendant) shot and killed a man at the conclusion of a discussion. Defendant then rode off on horseback with co-defendant after the shooting. Defendant was subsequently captured and convicted of murder.

Synopsis of Rule of Law. The presence of another person at the scene of a murder who does not assist in carrying out the murder is not sufficient to implicate that person as an accomplice in the absence of evidence of a prior agreement to render assistance in the crime.
Continue reading “Hicks v. United States”

State v. Davis

Brief Fact Summary. The Defendant, Davis (Defendant), was convicted of attempted murder for hiring someone to kill another man so that he could collect the insurance money. The man he hired to do the killing was actually an undercover police officer who never intended to carry out the crime.

Synopsis of Rule of Law. Mere acts of preparation, failing to lead directly or proximately to the completion of a crime, cannot sustain a conviction for an “attempt” crime.
Continue reading “State v. Davis”

People v. Jaffe

Brief Fact Summary. The Defendant, Jaffe (Defendant), was convicted of attempting to receive stolen property, but challenged his conviction on the basis that the property – twenty yards of cloth – was not, in fact, stolen at the time he purchased it.

Synopsis of Rule of Law. A person may not be convicted of attempting to commit a crime, if the crime itself, if completed, would not be a criminal offense.
Continue reading “People v. Jaffe”

McQuirter v. State

Brief Fact Summary. The Defendant, McQuirter (Defendant) a black man, was convicted of attempted rape. The Defendant was witnessed by a white woman following her down a road. After his arrest, the Defendant also allegedly confessed to the police that he intended to rape her.

Synopsis of Rule of Law. The element of intent is a question for the jury, who may consider social conditions and customs founded upon racial differences in determining whether a defendant intended to commit a particular crime.
Continue reading “McQuirter v. State”

United States v. Jackson

Brief Fact Summary. Defendant, Jackson, robbed a bank after he was released from prison on a work release program. Jackson had just finished serving two conviction sentences for robbery. He was sentenced to life in prison under a statute which provided that anyone with three previous felony convictions for robbery or burglary (or both) who possesses a firearm shall be imprisoned not less than fifteen years without the possibility of parole. Jackson had been previously convicted of four armed bank robberies and one armed robbery.

Synopsis of Rule of Law. The selection of a sentence within the statutory range is free of appellate review.
Continue reading “United States v. Jackson”

Smallwood v. State

Brief Fact Summary. The Defendant, Smallwood, a knowingly HIV-positive individual (Defendant), was convicted of attempted murder of three rape victims for sexually assaulting them without using a condom.

Synopsis of Rule of Law. The mere act of having unprotected sex with another person, knowing that one is HIV positive, is not sufficient to support an inference of an intent to kill.
Continue reading “Smallwood v. State”

People v. Rizzo

Brief Fact Summary. The Defendant, Rizzo and three others (Defendant), were convicted of attempted robbery, despite the fact they were caught by police prior to ever coming within the vicinity of the person they allegedly attempted to rob at gunpoint.

Synopsis of Rule of Law. An “attempt” to commit a crime is not proven unless a defendant’s actions come very near to the actual accomplishment of the attempted crime.
Continue reading “People v. Rizzo”

Commonwealth v. Atencio

Brief Fact Summary. The Defendants, Atencio and another individual (Defendants), were convicted of manslaughter arising out of the death of their companion who fatally shot himself in the head during a game of “Russian roulette.”

Synopsis of Rule of Law. A person is criminally liable for the death of another where he cooperates in a reckless activity that brings about the death of another participant.
Continue reading “Commonwealth v. Atencio”

State v. McFadden

Brief Fact Summary. The Defendant, McFadden (Defendant), was convicted of two counts of involuntary manslaughter arising out of his participation in a drag race. A fatal collision occurred when the individual against whom the Defendant was racing swerved into an oncoming lane of traffic, killing himself and a passenger in another vehicle.

Synopsis of Rule of Law. A defendant may be held criminally liable for the death of another where there is evidence that defendant’s conduct was a proximate cause of the resulting death.
Continue reading “State v. McFadden”

Stephenson v. State

Brief Fact Summary. A woman, who had been kidnapped by the Defendant, Stephenson (Defendant), committed suicide with a poison pill evidently in order to forego facing further physical and emotional abuse, including attempted rape, from her kidnapper.

Synopsis of Rule of Law. A homicide is committed where an intervening actor who causes the fatal blow is rendered irresponsible as a result of defendant’s unlawful conduct.
Continue reading “Stephenson v. State”

Commonwealth v. Root

Brief Fact Summary. The Defendant, Root (Defendant), was found guilty of involuntary manslaughter for the death of man against whom he was competing in a car race on a highway. The decedent was killed when he swerved into a lane of oncoming traffic in order to pass Defendant’s car.

Synopsis of Rule of Law. The crime of involuntary manslaughter requires both reckless conduct on the part of the defendant and that that recklessness was the direct cause of the resulting death.
Continue reading “Commonwealth v. Root”

People v. Campbell

Brief Fact Summary. The Defendant, Campbell (Defendant), encouraged the victim to commit suicide and offered him his own gun with which to do so. The victim, who had been drinking heavily with Defendant, fatally shot himself once Defendant had left.

Synopsis of Rule of Law. Encouraging another person to kill himself and creating conditions to more readily facilitate that person in taking his life, does not rise to the level of intentional murder.
Continue reading “People v. Campbell”