(a) A person is guilty of conspiracy when, with intent that conduct constituting a crime be performed, he agrees with one or more persons to engage in or cause the performance of such conduct, and any one of them commits an overt act in pursuance of such conspiracy.

(b) It shall be a defense to a charge of conspiracy 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 purpose.

(1969, P.A. 828, S. 48, 49; 1971, P.A. 871, S. 16.)

History: 1971 act amended Subsec. (b) to remove reference to “affirmative” defense.

See Sec. 53a-50 re effect of motivation on renunciation.

Cited. 169 C. 377; Id., 517; Id., 642. Generally, may prosecute and sentence defendant for both conspiracy to commit offense and offense itself; Wharton's rule: An agreement by two persons to commit crime which necessarily requires participation of two persons cannot be prosecuted as conspiracy; rule currently valid only as presumption of legislative intent; exception to rule when more persons than required participate; abuse of conspiracy charge to bring in otherwise improper evidence. 171 C. 105. Cited. Id., 524; 172 C. 74; 174 C. 135; Id., 338; Id., 376; 176 C. 131; 177 C. 370; 178 C. 67; Id., 163; Id., 649. Defendant is entitled to a theory of defense instruction as a matter of law when evidence under section is before jury. Id., 704. Cited. 180 C. 481; 182 C. 262; Id., 595; 184 C. 369; 186 C. 426; Id., 648; Id., 696; 187 C. 109; Id., 264; Id., 513; 188 C. 515; Id., 542; Id., 671; 189 C. 201; Id., 337; 190 C. 259; 191 C. 360; 194 C. 18; Id., 361; 195 C. 128; Id., 183; Id., 598; 196 C. 115; Id., 567; 197 C. 201; Id., 326; Id., 413; Id., 644. There is no such thing as a conspiracy to commit a crime which is defined in terms of recklessly or negligently causing a result, therefore conspiracy to commit arson in the third degree in violation of this statute and Sec. 53a-113 is not crime cognizable under state law. 199 C. 1. Cited. Id., 14; 200 C. 113; Id., 310; 201 C. 489; 202 C. 520; 204 C. 240; Id., 630; 207 C. 323; 209 C. 1; 210 C. 435; 211 C. 289; 212 C. 195; Id., 387; Id., 593; 213 C. 233. Conspiracy charge against defendant is barred after acquittal of sole alleged coconspirator; conspiracy statute as “bilateral” in nature discussed. Id., 243. Cited. Id., 422; Id., 708; 215 C. 716; Id., 739; 216 C. 801; 218 C. 349; Id., 432; 220 C. 602; Id., 765; 221 C. 447; Id., 595; 223 C. 243; Id., 384; 224 C. 322; 225 C. 270; Id., 347; 227 C. 1; Id., 32; Id., 207; 235 C. 397; Id., 679; Id., 748; 236 C. 176; Id., 514; 237 C. 518; 238 C. 380; 239 C. 56; Id., 481; 240 C. 210; Id., 708; 241 C. 322; 242 C. 93. The requisite evidence of an agreement between individuals accused as coconspirators may be provided by a coconspirator's conduct at the scene. 290 C. 816. Conspiracy to commit a reckless act is not a cognizable crime in this state because it is legally impossible to conspire to commit or achieve an unintentional or reckless act. 305 C. 101, but see 318 C. 1. To satisfy specific intent requirements for a conviction of conspiracy to distribute drugs, state must proffer evidence of an agreement to distribute drugs, in addition to mere buyer-seller relationship. 311 C. 1.

Cited. 1 CA 524; 3 CA 503; 5 CA 347; Id., 491; Id., 599; 8 CA 119; Id., 478; Id., 667; 9 CA 548; 10 CA 130; Id., 147; Id., 447; 11 CA 397; Id., 621; 14 CA 205; Id., 445; Id., 605; Id., 807; 15 CA 122; Id., 328; Id., 539; 16 CA 18; Id., 601; 17 CA 247; Id., 648; 19 CA 554; Id., 640; 21 CA 299; Id., 386; Id., 519; 22 CA 449; Id., 567; 23 CA 502; Id., 615; Id., 667; 24 CA 316; Id., 493; 26 CA 94; Id., 667; Id., 779; 27 CA 596; 28 CA 34; Id., 126; Id., 416; 29 CA 359; Id., 843; 30 CA 190; Id., 232; Id., 550; Id., 654; Id., 712; 32 CA 224; 33 CA 253; Id., 409; 34 CA 751; judgment reversed, see 233 C. 211; 35 CA 714; Id., 839; 36 CA 59; Id., 190; Id., 454; Id., 556; Id., 631; Id., 672; Id., 753; Id., 774; 37 CA 219; Id., 456; judgment reversed, see 236 C. 176; 38 CA 481; Id., 536; Id., 581; Id., 777; Id., 868; 39 CA 224; Id., 333; Id., 526; Id., 550; 40 CA 515; Id., 789; 41 CA 47; Id., 147; Id., 495; 42 CA 472; Id., 500; Id., 555; Id., 687; 43 CA 142; Id., 252; Id., 555; 44 CA 338; 45 CA 110; Id., 282; Id., 455; 46 CA 684; Id., 791. Elements of crime of conspiracy under section discussed. 63 CA 82. Statute is bilateral in nature in that conspiracy requires a showing that two or more coconspirators intended to engage in or cause conduct that constitutes a crime. 64 CA 384. Conviction and sentencing for multiple conspiracy offenses based on a single agreement is double jeopardy violation. 65 CA 788. Elements of crime of conspiracy discussed. 70 CA 393. There was sufficient evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that defendant knowingly entered into a conspiracy to possess a narcotic substance with intent to sell. 75 CA 223. Jury instructions on conspiracy to commit murder must indicate that state was required to prove intent to agree or conspire to commit murder and intent to cause murder. 92 CA 92. Attempt to commit robbery in first degree in violation of Sec. 53a-49 and conspiracy to commit robbery in violation of this section are separate and distinct offenses for purposes of double jeopardy. 118 CA 35. Defendant's sentences on four separate conspiracy charges arising from two incidents constituted double jeopardy. 124 CA 9. Conviction for two conspiracy charges arising from same agreement constituted double jeopardy. 125 CA 307. Conspiracy is a specific intent crime, with the intent divided into two elements: The intent to agree or conspire, and the intent to commit the offense which is the object of the conspiracy. 126 CA 192. Conviction of conspiracy to possess narcotics under Sec. 21a-279(a) and conspiracy to possess narcotics with intent to sell under Sec. 21a-277(a) constitutes double jeopardy. 137 CA 733. Conviction for conspiracy to commit false statement under Sec. 53a-157b and conspiracy to fabricate physical evidence under Sec. 53a-155 pursuant to the same unlawful agreement violates constitutional protection against double jeopardy. 138 CA 420; judgment reversed in part, see 325 C. 399. Multiple sentences for 3 separate conspiracies arising out of a single unlawful agreement violates prohibition against double jeopardy. 144 CA 731; judgment affirmed, see 320 C. 781. Evidence insufficient to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that defendant or alleged coconspirator stole headphones, either as a substantive crime or as overt act in furtherance of conspiracy. 164 CA 25.

Cited. 29 CS 344; 30 CS 211. Overt act is essential element of offense and must be alleged in information charging conspiracy. 35 CS 96. Cited. 36 CS 603; 37 CS 527; Id., 853; 38 CS 301; Id., 374; Id., 593.

Subsec. (a):

Cited. 177 C. 243; 189 C. 752; 192 C. 383; 199 C. 389; 200 C. 586; 201 C. 289; 203 C. 420; 207 C. 118; 210 C. 78; Id., 619; 212 C. 50; Id., 485; 213 C. 243; 214 C. 122; Id., 344; 215 C. 570; 217 C. 243; 218 C. 151; 223 C. 635; 227 C. 363; 230 C. 351; 232 C. 431; judgment superseded by en banc reconsideration, see 235 C. 502; Id., 537; 235 C. 502; 239 C. 235; Id., 467; 240 C. 727; 241 C. 1; Id., 502; 242 C. 125; Id., 296. Appellate Court in 41 CA 495 reversed trial court's judgment on grounds of insufficient evidence to convict, judgment of Appellate Court reversed. Id., 485. Evidence was sufficient to support conspiracy conviction. 253 C. 354. Where two defendants were tried separately and their respective juries were presented with separate, independent evidence of their agreement to commit the crime in question, acquittal of defendant's coconspirator did not nullify defendant's conviction of the same charge. 257 C. 587. To prove defendant guilty of conspiracy to commit robbery in the second degree in violation of Subsec. and Sec. 53a-135(a)(2), state needs to prove defendant specifically agreed that there would be the display or threatened use of what was represented as a deadly weapon or dangerous object during the robbery or immediate flight therefrom. 315 C. 451.

Cited. 7 CA 701; 9 CA 313; 14 CA 309; judgment reversed, see 212 C. 50; Id., 688; 15 CA 416; 16 CA 245; Id., 402; 18 CA 134; 19 CA 179; Id., 195; 20 CA 665; 22 CA 340; 23 CA 602; Id., 746; judgment reversed, see 221 C. 595; 25 CA 3; Id., 21; Id., 318; 26 CA 279; 27 CA 558; Id., 161; Id., 306; Id., 474; Id., 645; Id., 721; 29 CA 59; Id., 207; 31 CA 370; 32 CA 842; 33 CA 122; Id., 339; judgment reversed, see 235 C. 502; Id., 647; 34 CA 58; judgment reversed, see 232 C. 537; Id., 96; judgment reversed, see 232 C. 537; Id., 595; 35 CA 740; 36 CA 41; Id., 483; Id., 488; 37 CA 156; Id., 360; Id., 574; 38 CA 434; 39 CA 63; Id., 242; Id., 579; Id., 645; 40 CA 47; Id., 526; 43 CA 488; Id., 830; 44 CA 499; 45 CA 270; 46 CA 640. Conviction for conspiracy to sell a controlled substance within one thousand five hundred feet of a public housing project reversed where trial court instructed that jury must find that conspiracy occurred within one thousand five hundred feet of public housing project; the law is not concerned with where the plan was hatched, but with where conspirators proposed to carry out its unlawful purpose. 73 CA 386. The nexus between defendant's role in the conspiracy and illegal conduct of his coconspirators was not so attenuated or remote that it would be unjust to hold him responsible for the criminal conduct of his coconspirators. 107 CA 413. Nothing in Subsec. requires state to prove future or past criminal acts; federal “buyer-seller exception” not applicable to charge of conspiracy to sell narcotics. 131 CA 433; judgment affirmed, see 311 C. 1. Existence of formal agreement between conspirators need not be proved and may be inferred from proof of the separate acts of the alleged coconspirators and the circumstances surrounding the commission of the acts. 147 CA 53. Defendant's conviction of and sentencing under Subsec. and Secs. 53a-123(a)(3) and 53a-124(a)(2) constitute multiple punishments for the same offense and violate defendant's right against double jeopardy. 176 CA 687.

Cited. 44 CS 490.

Subsec. (b):

Cited. 40 CA 526. Breakdown of an agreement does not end a conspiracy or disqualify previous overt acts. 131 CA 433.