The correct answer is false. Under most jurisdictions applying modern conspiracy laws, an overt act is required to complete the crime of conspiracy. An overt act demonstrates an actual step taken to further the agreement, transitioning the conspiracy from mere planning to actionable conduct. Without it, the agreement alone is insufficient for criminal liability. Misunderstanding this requirement often leads to error. Conversely, jurisdictions applying common-law conspiracy rules do not require an overt act; however, most states and federal law adopt the overt act requirement, making it the standard interpretation.
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 is the overt act requirement in conspiracy law?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
How do common-law conspiracy rules differ from modern conspiracy laws?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
Why is the overt act requirement significant in conspiracy cases?