18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 903

 Criminal conspiracy.

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section PA-LEGpalegis.us JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

§ 903.  Criminal conspiracy.

(a)  Definition of conspiracy.--A person is guilty of conspiracy with another person or persons to commit a crime if with the intent of promoting or facilitating its commission he:

(1)  agrees with such other person or persons that they or one or more of them will engage in conduct which constitutes such crime or an attempt or solicitation to commit such crime; or

(2)  agrees to aid such other person or persons in the planning or commission of such crime or of an attempt or solicitation to commit such crime.

(b)  Scope of conspiratorial relationship.--If a person guilty of conspiracy, as defined by subsection (a) of this section, knows that a person with whom he conspires to commit a crime has conspired with another person or persons to commit the same crime, he is guilty of conspiring with such other person or persons, to commit such crime whether or not he knows their identity.

(c)  Conspiracy with multiple criminal objectives.--If a person conspires to commit a number of crimes, he is guilty of only one conspiracy so long as such multiple crimes are the object of the same agreement or continuous conspiratorial relationship.

(d)  Joinder and venue in conspiracy prosecutions.--

(1)  Subject to the provisions of paragraph (2) of this subsection, two or more persons charged with criminal conspiracy may be prosecuted jointly if:

(i)  they are charged with conspiring with one another; or

(ii)  the conspiracies alleged, whether they have the same or different parties, are so related that they constitute different aspects of a scheme of organized criminal conduct.

(2)  In any joint prosecution under paragraph (1) of this subsection:

(i)  no defendant shall be charged with a conspiracy in any county other than one in which he entered into such conspiracy or in which an overt act pursuant to such conspiracy was done by him or by a person with whom he conspired;

(ii)  neither the liability of any defendant nor the admissibility against him of evidence of acts or declarations of another shall be enlarged by such joinder; and

(iii)  the court shall order a severance or take a special verdict as to any defendant who so requests, if it deems it necessary or appropriate to promote the fair determination of his guilt or innocence, and shall take any other proper measures to protect the fairness of the trial.

(e)  Overt act.--No person may be convicted of conspiracy to commit a crime unless an overt act in pursuance of such conspiracy is alleged and proved to have been done by him or by a person with whom he conspired.

(f)  Renunciation.--It is a defense that the actor, after conspiring to commit a crime, thwarted the success of the conspiracy, under circumstances manifesting a complete and voluntary renunciation of his criminal intent.

(g)  Duration of conspiracy.--For purposes of 42 Pa.C.S. § 5552(d) (relating to commission of offense):

(1)  conspiracy is a continuing course of conduct which terminates when the crime or crimes which are its object are committed or the agreement that they be committed is abandoned by the defendant and by those with whom he conspired;

(2)  such abandonment is presumed if neither the defendant nor anyone with whom he conspired does any overt act in pursuance of the conspiracy during the applicable period of limitation; and

(3)  if an individual abandons the agreement, the conspiracy is terminated as to him only if and when he advises those with whom he conspired of his abandonment or he informs the law enforcement authorities of the existence of the conspiracy and of his participation therein.

(Apr. 28, 1978, P.L.202, No.53, eff. 60 days)

 

1978 Amendment.  Act 53 amended subsec. (g).

Cross References.  Section 903 is referred to in sections 4120, 5702 of this title; sections 5552, 6302 of Title 42 (Judiciary and Judicial Procedure).

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 1,632 cases (214 in the last 5 years), 1975–2026 · leading case: Com. v. James, J
Com. v. James, J (2023) pasuperct · cites it 10× “§ 780-113(a)(16)); [conspiracy] (18 Pa.C.S. § 903); and criminal use of communication facility (18 Pa.”
Commonwealth, Aplt v. Kingston, S. (2016) pa · cites it 8× “18 Pa.C.S. § 903(a). Dan’s intent to promote or to facilitate the robbery satisfies the mens rea requirement for all three crimes, see 18 Pa.”
Commonwealth v. Bracalielly (1995) pa · cites it 12× “[8] 18 Pa.C.S. § 903(a). [9] 35 Pa.S. § 780-113(a)(16).”
Commonwealth, Aplt. v. Burton, S. (2017) pa · cites it 3× “2 18 Pa.C.S. § 903. [J-110-2016] - 3 February 21, 2007.”
Commonwealth v. Chambers (2018) pa · cites it 5× “§ 2702(a), criminal conspiracy, *405 18 Pa.C.S. § 903, possessing instruments of crime, 18 Pa.”
Commonwealth v. Jacobs (2012) pa · cites it 8× “18 Pa.C.S. § 903(a). The criminal information alleged that Appellant attempted to escape when, "with *980 intent to commit the crime of Escape, [he].”
Commonwealth, Aplt v. Gross, E. (2014) pa · cites it 6× “A criminal complaint was filed in Monroe County charging Gross with criminal conspiracy, 18 Pa.C.S. § 903(a); firearms not to be carried without a license, id.”
Commonwealth v. Andrews (2001) pa · cites it 5× “See 18 Pa.C.S. § 903(a). Because of the difficulties associated with proving an actual conspiratorial agreement, in the absence of testimony from one of the conspirators, the Commonwealth is not required to establish the existence of an explicit or formal agreement with direct…”
Commonwealth v. Sanchez (2013) pa · cites it 3× “18 Pa.C.S. § 903; Commonwealth v. Weimer, 602 Pa.”
Commonwealth v. Housman (2009) pa · cites it 4× “See 18 Pa.C.S. § 903. [5] *833 Further, appellant contends his death sentence must be vacated because the evidence failed to support the only aggravating circumstance the jury found—that appellant committed a killing while in the perpetration of the felony of kidnapping.”
Commonwealth, Aplt v. Descares (2016) pa · cites it 2× “3 18 Pa.C.S. § 903. [J-20-2016] - 2 to which he is pleading guilty will result in deportation, effectively abrogating Pennsylvania’s longstanding rule, expressed in Frometa, that counsel may not be held ineffective for failing to inform a client of the collateral consequence of…”
Commonwealth v. Johnson (2018) pasuperct · cites it 2× “§ 3701(a)(1)(ii) and (iv) (counts 1 & 3); one count of conspiracy to commit robbery, 18 Pa.C.S. § 903 (count 2); one count of theft by unlawful taking, 18 Pa.”
— 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 903(1)(1) — 1 case
Com. v. Baker, J. (2016) pasuperct
— 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 903(2) — 1 case
Com. v. Rogers, K. (2017) pasuperct
— 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 903(3121) — 1 case
Com. v. Moose, Jr., C. (2015) pasuperct
— 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 903(3502) — 1 case
Com. v. Crossley, T. (2015) pasuperct
— 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 903(3701) — 2 cases
Com. v. Spurell, D. (2016) pasuperct
Com. v. Mann, S. (2016) pasuperct
— 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 903(A) — 1 case
— 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 903(A)(1) — 3 cases
Com. v. Waltemyer, T. (2016) pasuperct
Com. v. Hidalgo, E., Jr. (2014) pasuperct
Commonwealth v. Stockbauer (2009) pactcompllancas
— 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 903(C) — 4 cases
Com. v. Maragh, D. (2016) pasuperct
Com. v. Fulk, E. (2017) pasuperct
Com. v. Reese, B. (2014) pasuperct
Com. v. Adbullah-Talib, H. (2015) pasuperct
— 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 903(a) — 230 cases
Com. v. James, J (2023) pasuperct “§ 780-113(a)(16)); [conspiracy] (18 Pa.C.S. § 903); and criminal use of communication facility (18 Pa.”
Commonwealth, Aplt v. Kingston, S. (2016) pa “18 Pa.C.S. § 903(a). Dan’s intent to promote or to facilitate the robbery satisfies the mens rea requirement for all three crimes, see 18 Pa.”
Commonwealth v. Jacobs (2012) pa “18 Pa.C.S. § 903(a). The criminal information alleged that Appellant attempted to escape when, "with *980 intent to commit the crime of Escape, [he].”
Commonwealth v. Andrews (2001) pa “See 18 Pa.C.S. § 903(a). Because of the difficulties associated with proving an actual conspiratorial agreement, in the absence of testimony from one of the conspirators, the Commonwealth is not required to establish the existence of an explicit or formal agreement with direct…”
— 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 903(a)(1) — 205 cases
Commonwealth v. Bracalielly (1995) pa “[8] 18 Pa.C.S. § 903(a). [9] 35 Pa.S. § 780-113(a)(16).”
Commonwealth v. Bibbs (2009) pasuperct
Commonwealth, Aplt. v. Burton, S. (2017) pa “2 18 Pa.C.S. § 903. [J-110-2016] - 3 February 21, 2007.”
Com. v. James, J (2023) pasuperct “§ 780-113(a)(16)); [conspiracy] (18 Pa.C.S. § 903); and criminal use of communication facility (18 Pa.”
— 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 903(a)(1)(2) — 3 cases
Commonwealth v. Pulanco (2009) pactcomplberks
Com. v. Spurell, D. (2016) pasuperct
Com. v. Cogmon, M. (2015) pasuperct
— 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 903(a)(2) — 9 cases
Commonwealth v. Ford (2008) pasuperct
Commonwealth v. Carey (1981) pasuperct
Commonwealth v. Kwatkoski (1979) pasuperct
Commonwealth v. Gross (2010) pactcomplmonroe
Com. v. Rodriguez, S. (2016) pasuperct
— 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 903(a)(e) — 2 cases
Com. v. Cambric, J. (2020) pasuperct
Commonwealth v. Sullivan (2003) pactcompllawren
— 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 903(a)(l) — 25 cases
Harmon v. Commonwealth (1988) pacommwct
Commonwealth v. Lazar (2007) pactcompllancas
Commonwealth v. Wilkins (2007) pactcompllawren
Commonwealth v. Heaney (2015) pactcompllawren
Commonwealth v. Gross (2010) pactcomplmonroe
— 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 903(a)(l)(2) — 8 cases
Commonwealth v. Hines (2008) pactcomplberks
Commonwealth v. Leonti (2007) pactcomplberks
Commonwealth v. Pulanco (2008) pactcomplberks
Commonwealth v. McNair (2010) pactcomplberks
Commonwealth v. Serrano (2009) pactcompllancas
— 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 903(a)(lX2) — 1 case
In re Fisher Bros. Textiles (1992) pactcompllehigh
— 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 903(b) — 4 cases
Commonwealth v. McClelland (2019) pasuperct
Com. v. Vargas, F. (2015) pasuperct
Com. v. Brokenborough, S. (2015) pasuperct
Com. v. Miller, O. (2015) pasuperct
— 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 903(c) — 118 cases
Com. v. Rivera, W. (2020) pasuperct
Commonwealth v. Sanchez (2013) pa “18 Pa.C.S. § 903; Commonwealth v. Weimer, 602 Pa.”
Commonwealth v. Andrews (2001) pa “See 18 Pa.C.S. § 903(a). Because of the difficulties associated with proving an actual conspiratorial agreement, in the absence of testimony from one of the conspirators, the Commonwealth is not required to establish the existence of an explicit or formal agreement with direct…”
Robertson v. Klem (2009) ca3
— 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 903(d) — 2 cases
Commonwealth v. Holguin (1978) pasuperct
Com. v. Geter, R. (2017) pasuperct
— 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 903(d)(1) — 1 case
Com. v. Vargas, F. (2015) pasuperct
— 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 903(d)(1)(i) — 1 case
— 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 903(d)(2)(i) — 1 case
Commonwealth v. Craft (1982) pasuperct
— 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 903(d)(l)(i) — 1 case
— 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 903(e) — 30 cases
Commonwealth, Aplt v. Kingston, S. (2016) pa “18 Pa.C.S. § 903(a). Dan’s intent to promote or to facilitate the robbery satisfies the mens rea requirement for all three crimes, see 18 Pa.”
Com. v. James, J (2023) pasuperct “§ 780-113(a)(16)); [conspiracy] (18 Pa.C.S. § 903); and criminal use of communication facility (18 Pa.”
Commonwealth, Aplt v. Gross, E. (2014) pa “A criminal complaint was filed in Monroe County charging Gross with criminal conspiracy, 18 Pa.C.S. § 903(a); firearms not to be carried without a license, id.”
— 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 903(f) — 2 cases
Commonwealth v. Nee (2010) mass
Com. v. Lambert, D. (2021) pasuperct
— 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 903(g)(1) — 4 cases
Commonwealth, Aplt v. Gross, E. (2014) pa “A criminal complaint was filed in Monroe County charging Gross with criminal conspiracy, 18 Pa.C.S. § 903(a); firearms not to be carried without a license, id.”
Com. v. McKenzie, E. (2022) pasuperct
— 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 903(g)(l) — 1 case
Commonwealth v. Gross (2010) pactcomplmonroe
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.