💕
Criminal Law • Accomplice Liability
CRIMLAW#069
Legal Definition
An accomplice is one who, with the intent the crime be committed, aids, counsels, or encourages the principal (silent approval is sufficient) and is liable for the encouraged crimes as well as all other foreseeable crimes.
Plain English Explanation
In other cards, you learned that solicitation is the crime of encouraging someone else to commit a crime when you genuinely intend for your encouragement to result in the solicited person committing the crime. In contrast, being an accomplice means that you do more than just talk: you are actually providing substantive help, problem solving, or even concealment of the crimes. An accomplice gets their hands dirty; they aid and abet.
As an aside: if you're a bit confused as to what the difference between "accomplice" and "co-conspirator" is, let me explain. "Conspiracy" is a specific crime where defendants agreed to commit a crime with one another. "Accomplice Liability" is more of a method that we use under the law to hold someone liable for helping another person commit a crime (either before, during, or after the crime was committed). In other words, "Accomplice Liability" is a family of theories similar to "agency law" that allows us to draw lines in the sand to assign blame to folks that played some role in helping a crime happen, even if they didn't commit it themselves.
As an aside: if you're a bit confused as to what the difference between "accomplice" and "co-conspirator" is, let me explain. "Conspiracy" is a specific crime where defendants agreed to commit a crime with one another. "Accomplice Liability" is more of a method that we use under the law to hold someone liable for helping another person commit a crime (either before, during, or after the crime was committed). In other words, "Accomplice Liability" is a family of theories similar to "agency law" that allows us to draw lines in the sand to assign blame to folks that played some role in helping a crime happen, even if they didn't commit it themselves.
Hypothetical
Hypo 1: Bob wants to rob a bank, but he doesn't own a gun or a car. He walks over to Sam's house and asks if he can borrow his gun and car to rob a bank, but he promises he'll return them as soon as he gets back. Sam agrees, and gives Bob his gun and car keys. Result: Sam is an accomplice to Bob's bank robbery and is liable.
Hypo 2: Bob wants to rob a bank, but he doesn't know when the best time is. He walks over to Sam's house and asks if he can help him. It so-happens that Sam used to be a security guard there. Sam shows Bob some blueprints of the bank and explains to him when security guards take their breaks, making it easier to rob the bank. Result: Sam is an accomplice to Bob's bank robbery because he is providing information and guidance that enables Bob to successfully commit the crime. You may be wondering whether this is a conspiracy: it is not. If Sam wanted to join in, then it would become a conspiracy. However, Sam is merely providing assistance to Bob who is going to independently commit the crime. Thus, Sam is an accomplice.
Hypo 2: Bob wants to rob a bank, but he doesn't know when the best time is. He walks over to Sam's house and asks if he can help him. It so-happens that Sam used to be a security guard there. Sam shows Bob some blueprints of the bank and explains to him when security guards take their breaks, making it easier to rob the bank. Result: Sam is an accomplice to Bob's bank robbery because he is providing information and guidance that enables Bob to successfully commit the crime. You may be wondering whether this is a conspiracy: it is not. If Sam wanted to join in, then it would become a conspiracy. However, Sam is merely providing assistance to Bob who is going to independently commit the crime. Thus, Sam is an accomplice.
