October Term 2002 · Docket 01-1184
Does a conspiracy charge require proof of a specific unlawful act?
The government argues conspiracy is an incomplete crime. The defense argues the lower court decided the case on evidence sufficiency.
Verified source milestones
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
The arguments, in order
This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.
Argument 1 ·
What happened at the argument
The government says conspiracy is an incomplete crime. The defense says the lower court decided the case on evidence sufficiency.
The government argues the essence of conspiracy is agreement. The defense argues the lower court decided the case on evidence sufficiency.
The government says the lower court decided the case on evidence sufficiency. The defense says the lower court decided the case on evidence sufficiency.
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 1-45 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 1-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-31 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 5-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 5-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 49, lines 23-45 — Transcript, file page 49, lines 23-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 51, lines 47-1 — Transcript, file page 51, lines 47-1
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
The government says conspiracy is an incomplete crime. The defense says the lower court decided the case on evidence sufficiency.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 1-45 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 1-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-31 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 49, lines 23-45 — Transcript, file page 49, lines 23-45
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on November 12, 2002.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 5-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 5-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 51, lines 47-1 — Transcript, file page 51, lines 47-1
What each side wants
The government wants the Court to accept its view on conspiracy law.
The defense wants the Court to keep the lower court's evidence ruling.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 1-45 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 1-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-31 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 49, lines 23-45 — Transcript, file page 49, lines 23-45
What each side says
The government argues conspiracy is an incomplete crime based on agreement.
The defense argues the lower court decided the case on evidence sufficiency.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 1-45 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 1-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-31 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 49, lines 23-45 — Transcript, file page 49, lines 23-45
What the justices asked
Chief Justice Rehnquist asked what the word inchoate means.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 51, lines 47-1 — Transcript, file page 51, lines 47-1
Why it matters
This case defines the legal standard for conspiracy charges. It clarifies how courts evaluate evidence in these trials.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 1-45 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 1-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-31 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 49, lines 23-45 — Transcript, file page 49, lines 23-45
What happens next
This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 5-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 5-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 51, lines 47-1 — Transcript, file page 51, lines 47-1
Official Court provenance
Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page
Title and summary sources
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 1-45 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 1-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-31 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 49, lines 23-45 — Transcript, file page 49, lines 23-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 1-45 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 1-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-31 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 49, lines 23-45 — Transcript, file page 49, lines 23-45
Revision history
- Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.
- Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.