Opinion ID: 2162844
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: effect of withdrawal from conspiracy on aiding and abetting.

Text: The court of appeals held that the trial court correctly instructed the jury that a person who withdraws from a conspiracy does not remove himself from aiding and abetting. Unfortunately the court of appeals then proceeded to hold that an aider and abettor cannot withdraw from a completed act of assistance. May v. State, supra, at 549, 550. That was not the question asked by the jury or answered by the trial court and is not an issue in this case. The question asked by the jury was not whether an aider and abettor can withdraw his assistance. It was By withdrawing from a conspiracy has a person removed themselves [sic] from aiding and abetting the commission of a crime? The trial court answered No to this question and the court of appeals found that No was a correct answer. It clearly is a correct answer under the provisions of sec. 939.05, Stats. The issue before the court of appeals was whether the trial court correctly answered the jury's inquiry concerning the effect of withdrawal from a conspiracy on aiding and abetting. In order for the court of appeals to decide this issue it was not necessary for it to decide whether it is possible for an aider and abettor to withdraw his aid and avoid criminal liability. The question posed by the jury did not require such a decision. In effect the court answered a question not asked by the jury and not answered by the trial court. Since the court of appeals decided an issue which was not before it, this court does not here determine whether the court of appeals was correct in concluding that an aider and abettor cannot withdraw his assistance.