People v. Genoa

Michigan Court of Appeals
188 Mich. App. 461, 470 N.W.2d 447 (1991)
ELI5:

Rule of Law:

A defendant cannot be convicted of attempting to aid and abet a crime where the underlying substantive crime was never committed by any person. The commission of the underlying crime is an essential element for a conviction based on an aiding and abetting theory.


Facts:

  • An undercover agent of the Michigan State Police met with the defendant at a hotel.
  • The agent proposed a deal in which the defendant would provide $10,000 to finance the purchase and subsequent sale of a kilogram of cocaine.
  • The agent promised to repay the defendant the $10,000, plus $3,500 in profits and a client list.
  • The defendant accepted the proposal and later returned to give the agent the $10,000.
  • The undercover agent never intended to purchase or sell cocaine; he was conducting a sting operation.
  • After receiving the money, the agent turned it over to the Michigan State Police.

Procedural Posture:

  • The defendant was charged in a Michigan district court with attempted possession with intent to deliver 650 grams or more of cocaine.
  • Following a preliminary examination, the district court judge dismissed the charge against the defendant.
  • The prosecution, as appellant, appealed the dismissal to the circuit court.
  • The circuit court affirmed the district court's dismissal.
  • The prosecution, as appellant, was granted leave to appeal to the Michigan Court of Appeals, with the defendant as the appellee.

Locked

Premium Content

Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief

You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture

Issue:

Does a defendant commit the crime of attempted possession with intent to deliver a controlled substance, under an aiding and abetting theory, by providing money to an undercover police officer for a drug transaction that the officer never intended to, and never did, carry out?


Opinions:

Majority - Shepherd, P.J.

No. A defendant cannot be convicted of attempting to aid and abet a crime that never occurred. For a conviction of aiding and abetting, the prosecution must prove that: (1) the underlying crime was committed by someone, (2) the defendant performed acts or gave encouragement which assisted the commission of the crime, and (3) the defendant intended the commission of the crime. In this case, the first element is absent because the undercover agent never committed the crime of possession with intent to deliver. Since the underlying crime was never committed, it was legally impossible for the defendant to aid and abet it, and therefore the charge must be dismissed.



Analysis:

This decision clarifies the scope of accomplice liability in Michigan, specifically the doctrine of legal impossibility. It establishes that for an aiding and abetting charge to succeed, the prosecution must prove the actual commission of the underlying offense. The court's ruling exposes a legislative gap where financing a proposed but ultimately fictitious crime, as in a police sting, is not illegal under existing aiding and abetting statutes. This may prompt the legislature to enact new laws that focus specifically on the intent and actions of individuals who attempt to finance criminal enterprises, regardless of whether the principal completes the crime.

G

Gunnerbot

AI-powered case assistant

Loaded: People v. Genoa (1991)

Try: "What was the holding?" or "Explain the dissent"