In the realm of criminal law, the concept of attempt plays a crucial role in determining the liability of an individual who sets out to commit a crime but fails to complete it. The notion of attempt is complex and has been the subject of much debate among legal scholars and practitioners. In this article, we will delve into the concept of attempt in criminal law, exploring its definition, elements, and implications.
Defining Attempt in Criminal Law
An attempt is generally defined as an act done with the intention of committing a crime, which falls short of completing the crime. In other words, an attempt is an incomplete crime, where the perpetrator has taken steps towards committing the offense but has not succeeded in completing it. The concept of attempt is often referred to as “inchoate crime,” which means that it is a crime that is not yet complete.
Elements of Attempt
To establish an attempt, the prosecution must prove the following elements:
- Intent: The perpetrator must have had the intention of committing the crime. This means that the individual must have had a clear and deliberate plan to commit the offense.
- Action: The perpetrator must have taken some action towards committing the crime. This can include preparing for the crime, taking steps towards committing it, or engaging in behavior that is preparatory to the crime.
- Proximity to the crime: The action taken by the perpetrator must be sufficiently proximate to the crime. This means that the action must be close enough to the crime to demonstrate a clear intention to commit it.
Examples of Attempt
To illustrate the concept of attempt, consider the following examples:
- A person who buys a gun with the intention of killing someone but is arrested before they can carry out the act has committed an attempt.
- A person who breaks into a house with the intention of stealing but is caught by the police before they can take any property has committed an attempt.
Theories of Attempt
There are two main theories of attempt: the “last act” theory and the “proximity” theory.
Last Act Theory
The last act theory holds that an attempt occurs when the perpetrator takes the last act necessary to commit the crime. This theory focuses on the physical act of committing the crime and requires that the perpetrator take the final step towards completing the offense.
Proximity Theory
The proximity theory, on the other hand, holds that an attempt occurs when the perpetrator takes an action that is sufficiently proximate to the crime. This theory focuses on the perpetrator’s intention and requires that the action taken be close enough to the crime to demonstrate a clear intention to commit it.
Attempt and Mens Rea
Mens rea, or guilty mind, is a critical element of attempt. To establish an attempt, the prosecution must prove that the perpetrator had the necessary mens rea to commit the crime. This means that the individual must have had a clear and deliberate plan to commit the offense.
Types of Mens Rea
There are two main types of mens rea: specific intent and general intent.
- Specific intent: Specific intent requires that the perpetrator have a clear and deliberate plan to commit the crime. This type of mens rea is typically required for crimes that involve a specific intent, such as murder or theft.
- General intent: General intent, on the other hand, requires that the perpetrator have a general intention to commit the crime. This type of mens rea is typically required for crimes that do not involve a specific intent, such as assault or battery.
Attempt and Actus Reus
Actus reus, or guilty act, is another critical element of attempt. To establish an attempt, the prosecution must prove that the perpetrator took some action towards committing the crime.
Types of Actus Reus
There are two main types of actus reus: physical act and omission.
- Physical act: A physical act is an action taken by the perpetrator that is directed towards committing the crime. This can include preparing for the crime, taking steps towards committing it, or engaging in behavior that is preparatory to the crime.
- Omission: An omission is a failure to act when there is a duty to do so. This can include failing to prevent a crime from occurring or failing to report a crime.
Attempt and Punishment
The punishment for attempt varies depending on the jurisdiction and the specific crime. In general, attempt is punished less severely than the completed crime.
Factors Affecting Punishment
There are several factors that can affect the punishment for attempt, including:
- Severity of the crime: The severity of the crime can affect the punishment for attempt. For example, an attempt to commit a serious crime such as murder may be punished more severely than an attempt to commit a less serious crime such as theft.
- Intent of the perpetrator: The intent of the perpetrator can also affect the punishment for attempt. For example, an attempt to commit a crime with a specific intent, such as murder, may be punished more severely than an attempt to commit a crime with a general intent, such as assault.
- Circumstances of the crime: The circumstances of the crime can also affect the punishment for attempt. For example, an attempt to commit a crime in a public place may be punished more severely than an attempt to commit a crime in a private place.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the concept of attempt in criminal law is complex and multifaceted. To establish an attempt, the prosecution must prove the elements of intent, action, and proximity to the crime. Theories of attempt, such as the last act theory and the proximity theory, can help to guide the analysis of attempt. Mens rea and actus reus are critical elements of attempt, and the punishment for attempt can vary depending on the jurisdiction and the specific crime.
What is an attempt in criminal law?
An attempt in criminal law refers to the act of trying or endeavoring to commit a crime, but not necessarily succeeding in doing so. It is a stage in the commission of a crime where the perpetrator has taken steps towards completing the offense, but for some reason, the crime is not fully carried out.
In order to be considered an attempt, the actions taken by the perpetrator must be more than just preparatory steps. They must be actions that are directly aimed at committing the crime, and they must be actions that would have resulted in the completion of the crime if they had not been interrupted or thwarted in some way.
What are the elements of an attempt?
The elements of an attempt typically include the intent to commit a crime, and some overt act towards the commission of that crime. The intent element requires that the perpetrator have a specific intention to commit the crime, and that they take actions that are consistent with that intention. The overt act element requires that the perpetrator take some action that is more than just preparatory, and that is directly aimed at committing the crime.
The specific elements of an attempt can vary depending on the jurisdiction and the specific crime involved. However, in general, the elements of an attempt are designed to distinguish between mere preparation or planning, and actual attempts to commit a crime.
How is attempt different from conspiracy?
Attempt and conspiracy are two related but distinct concepts in criminal law. Conspiracy refers to an agreement between two or more people to commit a crime, while attempt refers to the act of trying to commit a crime. Conspiracy can involve mere planning or discussion, while attempt requires some overt act towards the commission of the crime.
In order to be convicted of conspiracy, the prosecution must show that there was an agreement to commit a crime, and that some overt act was taken in furtherance of that agreement. In contrast, to be convicted of attempt, the prosecution must show that the perpetrator took some overt act towards the commission of the crime, and that they had the intent to commit the crime.
What are the different types of attempts?
There are several different types of attempts, including attempted murder, attempted robbery, and attempted burglary. Each of these types of attempts involves the act of trying to commit a specific crime, but not necessarily succeeding in doing so.
The specific type of attempt will depend on the crime that the perpetrator is trying to commit. For example, attempted murder involves the act of trying to kill someone, while attempted robbery involves the act of trying to take someone’s property by force or threat.
What are the defenses to an attempt charge?
There are several defenses that can be raised to an attempt charge, including lack of intent, lack of overt act, and impossibility. Lack of intent involves arguing that the perpetrator did not have the specific intention to commit the crime, while lack of overt act involves arguing that the perpetrator did not take any actions that were directly aimed at committing the crime.
Impossibility involves arguing that it was impossible for the perpetrator to have committed the crime, even if they had taken the actions that they did. For example, if someone tries to kill someone who is already dead, they cannot be convicted of attempted murder because it is impossible to kill someone who is already dead.
What are the penalties for an attempt conviction?
The penalties for an attempt conviction can vary depending on the jurisdiction and the specific crime involved. However, in general, the penalties for an attempt conviction are less severe than the penalties for a completed crime.
For example, if someone is convicted of attempted murder, they may face a prison sentence of several years, while someone who is convicted of murder may face a life sentence. However, the specific penalties will depend on the jurisdiction and the specific circumstances of the case.
How does attempt impact sentencing?
Attempt can impact sentencing in several ways. First, the fact that the perpetrator was only attempting to commit a crime, rather than actually committing it, may be taken into account as a mitigating factor. This means that the perpetrator may receive a lighter sentence than they would have if they had actually committed the crime.
On the other hand, the fact that the perpetrator took actions towards the commission of a crime may be taken into account as an aggravating factor. This means that the perpetrator may receive a harsher sentence than they would have if they had only planned or discussed the crime, but had not taken any actions towards its commission.