Wyoming Statutes
Wyo. Stat. § 35-7-1042 (2026)
Attempts and conspiracies.
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
WY-LEGwyoleg.gov
JustiaTitle on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
Any person who attempts or conspires to commit any offense under this article within the state of Wyoming or who conspires to commit an act beyond the state of Wyoming which if done in this state would be an offense punishable under this article, shall be punished by imprisonment or fine or both which may not exceed the maximum punishment prescribed for the offense the commission of which was the object of the attempt or conspiracy.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 40
cases (4 in the last 5 years), 1981–2026 · leading case: Palato v. State, 988 P.2d 512 (Wyo. 1999).
Palato v. State, 988 P.2d 512 (Wyo. 1999). “Both defendants are alleged to have conspired with a government agent to deliver a controlled substance in violation of Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 35-7-1042 (Lexis 1999), raising the issue of whether Wyoming follows a unilateral or bilateral approach with respect to conspiracies…”
Wehr v. State, 841 P.2d 104 (Wyo. 1992). “Whether the evidence was insufficient to establish that Appellant conspired to deliver a controlled substance in violation of Wyo.Stat. § 35-7-1042 (1977). III. Whether Appellant was denied the right to a speedy trial in violation of the United States and Wyoming Constitutions…”
Baker v. State, 2010 WY 6 (Wyo. 2010). “For the reasons stated above, we hold that the controlled substances conspiracy statute embraces the bilateral theory of conspiracy, in accordance with federal case law.”
Estrada-Sanchez v. State, 2003 WY 45 (Wyo. 2003). “Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 35-7-1042 (Michie 1997).”
Dallas Clem Mitchell v. The State of Wyoming, 2020 WY 142 (Wyo. 2020). “§ 35-7-1031 (a)(ii), and with conspiracy to deliver a controlled substance, in violation of Wyo. Stat. Ann. §§ 35-7-1042 and 35-7-1031(a)(i).”
Apodaca v. State, 627 P.2d 1023 (Wyo. 1981). “1977, 2 along with conspiracy to deliver a controlled substance in violation of § 35-7-1042, W.S. 1977, 3 appellant has appealed on two bases.”
Wells v. State, 846 P.2d 589 (Wyo. 1992). “Appellant was extradited from Colorado, and on August 15, 1990, a jury found him guilty of conspiracy to distribute a controlled substance in violation of Wyo. Stat. §§ 35-7-1042, 35-7-1031(a)(i), and 35-7-1016(b)(iv) (1988) [1] and of distributing a *591 controlled substance in…”
Urrutia v. State, 924 P.2d 965 (Wyo. 1996). “] ARGUMENT II: I) There was insufficient evidence to convict the Appellant, Chad Urrutia, of conspiracy to deliver a controlled substance under Wyoming Statute § 35-7-1042 and § 35-7-1031(a)(ii) given the fact that the State did not prove that the Appellant ever agreed to…”
Burke v. State, 746 P.2d 852 (Wyo. 1987). “Section 35-7-1042, W.S. 1977; Apodaca v. State, Wyo.”
Jandro v. State, 781 P.2d 512 (Wyo. 1989). “" Section 35-7-1042, W.S. 1977, provides: "Any person who attempts or conspires to commit any offense under this article within the state of Wyoming or who conspires to commit an act beyond the state of Wyoming which if done in this state would be an offense punishable under…”
Adams v. State, 2003 WY 152 (Wyo. 2003). “[11] After trial, a jury convicted appellant Allen Marty Adams (Adams) of conspiracy to deliver a controlled substance, methamphetamine, in violation of Wyo. Stat. Ann. §§ 35-7-1042 and 85-7-1081(a)(i).”
Ekholm v. State, 2004 WY 159 (Wyo. 2004). “In that regard, Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 35-7-1042 states that any "person who attempts or conspires to commit any offense under this article within the state of Wyoming .”
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.