A defendant, intending to rob a jewelry store, purchases a ski mask, gloves, and a crowbar. They drive to the store, park nearby, and sit in their car for several minutes, observing the store's activity. Before exiting the vehicle, the defendant changes their mind and drives away. Under the doctrine of attempt, are the defendant's actions sufficient for criminal liability?
Intent is not established without the defendant entering the store or physically attempting to access the property.
Observing the store from the car suggests the defendant initiated planning but does not meet the requirements of an attempt.
The actions taken by the defendant were preparatory and did not constitute a substantial step toward committing the robbery.
The defendant's purchase of tools and presence near the store indicate intent but do not establish an attempt to commit robbery.
The correct answer explains that for criminal attempt liability to attach, the defendant's actions must constitute a substantial step toward commission of the intended crime, demonstrating intent and moving beyond mere preparation. Sitting in the car and observing the store from a distance, while suggestive of intent, does not qualify as a substantial step because the defendant did not begin executing the planned robbery or take actions strongly corroborating the intent to commit the crime. Purchasing tools and driving to the store, while indicative of intent, are merely preparatory actions and do not signify the crossing of the line toward criminal attempt. Other incorrect answers misinterpret these nuances. For example, observing the store from the car remains an act of preparation, not execution, while requiring physical contact or entry misstates legal thresholds for establishing an attempt.
Ask Bash
Bash is our AI bot, trained to help you pass your exam. AI Generated Content may display inaccurate information, always double-check anything important.
What constitutes a 'substantial step' in the context of criminal attempt?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
Why are mere preparatory actions not enough for criminal liability?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
How does the doctrine of attempt apply to cases where the crime is not completed?