Pa. Cons. Stat. » 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. (CRIMES AND OFFENSES) / Chapter 3
Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes

18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 306 (2026)

  Liability for conduct of another; complicity.

✓ current as of May 2026
Coverage note: this corpus holds the consolidated Pa.C.S. titles only. Unconsolidated P.S. statutes (UTPCPL 73 P.S. § 201-1, Liquor Code, wage payment laws) are not included; a miss here does not mean the statute does not exist. Check palegis.us.
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section PA-LEGpalegis.us JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

§ 306.  Liability for conduct of another; complicity.

(a)  General rule.--A person is guilty of an offense if it is committed by his own conduct or by the conduct of another person for which he is legally accountable, or both.

(b)  Conduct of another.--A person is legally accountable for the conduct of another person when:

(1)  acting with the kind of culpability that is sufficient for the commission of the offense, he causes an innocent or irresponsible person to engage in such conduct;

(2)  he is made accountable for the conduct of such other person by this title or by the law defining the offense; or

(3)  he is an accomplice of such other person in the commission of the offense.

(c)  Accomplice defined.--A person is an accomplice of another person in the commission of an offense if:

(1)  with the intent of promoting or facilitating the commission of the offense, he:

(i)  solicits such other person to commit it; or

(ii)  aids or agrees or attempts to aid such other person in planning or committing it; or

(2)  his conduct is expressly declared by law to establish his complicity.

(d)  Culpability of accomplice.--When causing a particular result is an element of an offense, an accomplice in the conduct causing such result is an accomplice in the commission of that offense, if he acts with the kind of culpability, if any, with respect to that result that is sufficient for the commission of the offense.

(e)  Status of actor.--In any prosecution for an offense in which criminal liability of the defendant is based upon the conduct of another person pursuant to this section, it is no defense that the offense in question, as defined, can be committed only by a particular class or classes of persons, and the defendant, not belonging to such class or classes, is for that reason legally incapable of committing the offense in an individual capacity.

(f)  Exceptions.--Unless otherwise provided by this title or by the law defining the offense, a person is not an accomplice in an offense committed by another person if:

(1)  he is a victim of that offense;

(2)  the offense is so defined that his conduct is inevitably incident to its commission; or

(3)  he terminates his complicity prior to the commission of the offense and:

(i)  wholly deprives it of effectiveness in the commission of the offense; or

(ii)  gives timely warning to the law enforcement authorities or otherwise makes proper effort to prevent the commission of the offense.

(g)  Prosecution of accomplice only.--An accomplice may be convicted on proof of the commission of the offense and of his complicity therein, though the person claimed to have committed the offense has not been prosecuted or convicted or has been convicted of a different offense or degree of offense or has an immunity to prosecution or conviction or has been acquitted.

 

Cross References.  Section 306 is referred to in sections 904, 3218, 6111 of this title; section 9711 of Title 42 (Judiciary and Judicial Procedure).

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 234 cases (26 in the last 5 years), 1975–2026 · leading case: Commonwealth v. Chambers, 188 A.3d 400 (Pa. 2018).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Commonwealth v. Chambers, 188 A.3d 400 (Pa. 2018). · cites it 6× “Unlike the trial court, the Superior Court outlined the statutory elements of accomplice liability, which are codified at 18 Pa.C.S. § 306. 4 In a brief analysis, the Superior Court determined that Chambers was an accomplice to the floral-shoed woman because, "when he began…”
Commonwealth v. Johnson, 966 A.2d 523 (Pa. 2009). · cites it 3× “See 18 Pa.C.S. § 306 (accomplice defined); see also Commonwealth v.”
Commonwealth v. Miller, 819 A.2d 504 (Pa. 2002). · cites it 6× “§ 306(b)(3), "[a] person is legally accountable for the conduct of another person when he is an accomplice of such other person in the commission of the offense.”
Commonwealth v. Flanagan, 854 A.2d 489 (Pa. 2004). · cites it 4× “18 Pa.C.S. § 306(d) (emphasis added); see also 18 Pa.”
Commonwealth v. Baker, 614 A.2d 663 (Pa. 1992). · cites it 6× “(13) The defendant committed the killing or was an accomplice in the killing, as defined in 18 Pa.C.S. § 306(c) (relating to liability for conduct of another; complicity), while in the perpetration of a felony under the provisions of the act of April 14, 1972 (P.”
Commonwealth v. Spence, 627 A.2d 1176 (Pa. 1993). · cites it 6× “To be an accomplice within the meaning of 18 Pa.C.S. § 306, an individual "must have knowledge of, and participate in, the specific crime charged.”
Gonzales v. Duenas-Alvarez, 549 U.S. 183 (2007). · cites it 2× “155 (2003); 18 Pa. Cons.Stat. § 306 (2002); R.I. Gen.”
Commonwealth v. Murphy, 844 A.2d 1228 (Pa. 2004). · cites it 3× “See 18 Pa.C.S. § 306; see also Commonwealth v.”
Commonwealth v. Treiber, S., Aplt, 121 A.3d 435 (Pa. 2015). · cites it 2× “18 Pa.C.S. § 306(c)(1). [J-49-2013] - 32 The record supports the PCRA court’s finding appellant failed to demonstrate entitlement to relief.”
Commonwealth v. Bricker, 581 A.2d 147 (Pa. 1990). · cites it 6× “18 Pa.C.S. § 306 provides, in pertinent part: (a) General rule.”
Commonwealth v. Rega, 933 A.2d 997 (Pa. 2007). · cites it 2× “Further, the Commonwealth asserts that if they had, the trial court would properly have rejected such a request because to receive an accomplice witness instruction with regard to a certain witness, that witness must have been an accomplice in the crimes charged against the…”
Matthews v. Konieczny, 527 A.2d 508 (Pa. 1987). · cites it 6× “2d 515 (1983), and its interpretation of certain sections of the Crimes Code, namely 18 Pa.C.S. §§ 306 and 6308, in terms of negligence per se, but on the policy of this Commonwealth with respect to sales of alcoholic beverages to minors, as expressed in Article IV of the Liquor…”
Show all 234 citing cases →
— 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 306(a) — 19 cases
Commonwealth v. Miller, 819 A.2d 504 (Pa. 2002). “§ 306(b)(3), "[a] person is legally accountable for the conduct of another person when he is an accomplice of such other person in the commission of the offense.”
Commonwealth, Aplt. v. Lynn, W., 114 A.3d 796 (Pa. 2015).
Commonwealth v. Rompilla, 653 A.2d 626 (Pa. 1995).
Commonwealth v. Jenkins, 96 A.3d 1055 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2014).
Baker v. Horn, 383 F. Supp. 2d 720 (E.D. Pa. 2005).
— 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 306(b) — 9 cases
Commonwealth v. Johnson, 966 A.2d 523 (Pa. 2009). “See 18 Pa.C.S. § 306 (accomplice defined); see also Commonwealth v.”
Commonwealth v. Chambers, 188 A.3d 400 (Pa. 2018). “Unlike the trial court, the Superior Court outlined the statutory elements of accomplice liability, which are codified at 18 Pa.C.S. § 306. 4 In a brief analysis, the Superior Court determined that Chambers was an accomplice to the floral-shoed woman because, "when he began…”
Commonwealth v. Potts, 566 A.2d 287 (Pa. 1989).
Commonwealth v. Lynn, 83 A.3d 434 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2013).
Commonwealth v. Porter, 446 A.2d 605 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1982).
— 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 306(b)(1) — 1 case
Com. v. Artis-Bryan, J. (Pa. Super. Ct. 2015).
— 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 306(b)(3) — 22 cases
Commonwealth v. Miller, 819 A.2d 504 (Pa. 2002). “§ 306(b)(3), "[a] person is legally accountable for the conduct of another person when he is an accomplice of such other person in the commission of the offense.”
Commonwealth v. Wojdak, 466 A.2d 991 (Pa. 1983).
Commonwealth v. Hassine, 490 A.2d 438 (Pa. 1985).
Commonwealth v. Lawson, 461 A.2d 807 (Pa. 1983).
Commonwealth v. Orlowski, 481 A.2d 952 (Pa. 1984).
— 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 306(c) — 66 cases
Commonwealth v. Baker, 614 A.2d 663 (Pa. 1992). “(13) The defendant committed the killing or was an accomplice in the killing, as defined in 18 Pa.C.S. § 306(c) (relating to liability for conduct of another; complicity), while in the perpetration of a felony under the provisions of the act of April 14, 1972 (P.”
Commonwealth v. Rega, 933 A.2d 997 (Pa. 2007). “Further, the Commonwealth asserts that if they had, the trial court would properly have rejected such a request because to receive an accomplice witness instruction with regard to a certain witness, that witness must have been an accomplice in the crimes charged against the…”
Commonwealth v. Knox, J., Aplt., 105 A.3d 1194 (Pa. 2014).
Commonwealth v. Lassiter, 722 A.2d 657 (Pa. 1998).
Commonwealth v. Johnson, 838 A.2d 663 (Pa. 2003).
— 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 306(c)(1) — 23 cases
Commonwealth v. Treiber, S., Aplt, 121 A.3d 435 (Pa. 2015). “18 Pa.C.S. § 306(c)(1). [J-49-2013] - 32 The record supports the PCRA court’s finding appellant failed to demonstrate entitlement to relief.”
Commonwealth v. Williams, 732 A.2d 1167 (Pa. 1999).
Commonwealth v. Chambers, 188 A.3d 400 (Pa. 2018). “Unlike the trial court, the Superior Court outlined the statutory elements of accomplice liability, which are codified at 18 Pa.C.S. § 306. 4 In a brief analysis, the Superior Court determined that Chambers was an accomplice to the floral-shoed woman because, "when he began…”
Aaron Tyson v. Superintendent Houtzdale SCI, 976 F.3d 382 (3rd Cir. 2020).
United States v. Kenneth Daniels, 915 F.3d 148 (3rd Cir. 2019).
— 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 306(c)(1)(i) — 2 cases
Com. v. Wasser, P. (Pa. Super. Ct. 2026).
Com. v. McClelland, D. (Pa. Super. Ct. 2015).
— 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 306(c)(1)(ii) — 14 cases
Commonwealth v. Hanible, 30 A.3d 426 (Pa. 2011).
Commonwealth v. Roebuck, 32 A.3d 613 (Pa. 2011).
Commonwealth v. Driver, 493 A.2d 778 (Pa. 1985).
Commonwealth v. Jackson, 463 A.2d 1036 (Pa. 1984).
Com. v. Wallace, V. (Pa. Super. Ct. 2015).
— 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 306(c)(1)(iii) — 1 case
United States v. Jacob Cartlidge, Jr., 808 F.2d 1064 (5th Cir. 1987).
— 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 306(c)(2) — 1 case
Com. v. Walker, J (Pa. Super. Ct. 2015).
— 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 306(c)(l)(ii) — 3 cases
Commonwealth v. Busanet, 54 A.3d 35 (Pa. 2012).
Commonwealth v. Jackson, 463 A.2d 1036 (Pa. 1984).
Com. v. Williams, R. (Pa. Super. Ct. 2017).
— 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 306(d) — 11 cases
Commonwealth v. Flanagan, 854 A.2d 489 (Pa. 2004). “18 Pa.C.S. § 306(d) (emphasis added); see also 18 Pa.”
Commonwealth v. Sepulveda, 55 A.3d 1108 (Pa. 2012).
Com. v. Dinell, Z., 270 A.3d 530 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2022).
Commonwealth v. Fisher, 80 A.3d 1186 (Pa. 2013).
Commonwealth v. Roebuck, 32 A.3d 613 (Pa. 2011).
— 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 306(e) — 1 case
Commonwealth v. Wilkins, 81 Pa. D. & C.4th 459 (2007).
— 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 306(f) — 3 cases
Commonwealth v. Spence, 627 A.2d 1176 (Pa. 1993). “To be an accomplice within the meaning of 18 Pa.C.S. § 306, an individual "must have knowledge of, and participate in, the specific crime charged.”
Commonwealth v. Hackett, 627 A.2d 719 (Pa. 1993).
Commonwealth v. Chmiel, 639 A.2d 9 (Pa. 1994).
— 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 306(f)(2) — 4 cases
Commonwealth v. Mills, 480 A.2d 1192 (Pa. 1984).
Commonwealth v. Griffin, 515 A.2d 1382 (Pa. 1986).
Commonwealth v. Brown, 369 A.2d 329 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1976).
Com. v. Akes, R. (Pa. Super. Ct. 2016).
— 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 306(f)(3)(i) — 2 cases
Commonwealth v. Lee, 399 A.2d 104 (Pa. 1979).
Commonwealth v. Milano, 1 Pa. D. & C.5th 225 (2007).
— 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 306(f)(3)(ii) — 1 case
Commonwealth v. Milano, 1 Pa. D. & C.5th 225 (2007).
— 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 306(g) — 11 cases
Commonwealth v. Johnson, 966 A.2d 523 (Pa. 2009). “See 18 Pa.C.S. § 306 (accomplice defined); see also Commonwealth v.”
Commonwealth v. Magliocco, 883 A.2d 479 (Pa. 2005).
Commonwealth v. Brewer, 876 A.2d 1029 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2005).
Commonwealth v. Campbell, 390 A.2d 761 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1978).
Commonwealth v. Byrd, 417 A.2d 173 (Pa. 1980).
— 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 306(v) — 1 case
Commonwealth v. Cleland, 66 Pa. D. & C.4th 225 (2004).
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.