State v. Mendoza, 889 A.2d 153 (2005)
- Facts: Undercover detectives A'Vant and Zuena posed as drug buyers in Providence. Robert Clement approached them, then led A'Vant to Antonio Mendoza's house. A'Vant gave Clement $20 in buy money; Clement rang the bell, Mendoza answered, the two went inside and reemerged with crack cocaine. Mendoza was convicted of conspiracy to violate the controlled-substances act.
- Issue: Under Wharton's Rule, does conspiracy lie when the object of the agreement is itself a crime that requires two participants (here, sale-and-delivery of drugs)?
- Rule: Wharton's Rule does not bar conspiracy when more than the minimum number of participants required by the target crime are involved.
- Analysis: Sale of drugs is a 2-person crime (seller + buyer)—a conspiracy between Mendoza and Clement to deliver to each other would be barred by WR. But here, Mendoza and Clement conspired to sell to A'Vant—a third party. Three participants make conspiracy distinct from the underlying offense.
- Judgment: Conviction affirmed.
Reading: pp. 350–53. See Wharton's Rule and Legal Impossibility.