Opinion ID: 1779869
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Count I (conspiracy to commit robbery)

Text: ¶ 37. Culp asserts that the State failed to prove a common plan and the necessary union of minds between Culp and Lowe to form a conspiracy. However, testimony from other witnesses, including Culp's co-conspirator, indicate that not only did Culp agree to the conspiracy, but also he was involved in its planning. ¶ 38. In order to convict for conspiracy pursuant to Miss.Code Ann. § 97-1-1, the State must prove that the conspirators intended to enter into a common plan to further the conspiracy's common purpose. Franklin v. State, 676 So.2d 287, 288 (Miss.1996). The conspiracy agreement need not be formal or express, but may be inferred from the circumstances, particularly by declarations, acts and conduct of the alleged conspirators. Id. A conspiracy requires proof of a union of the minds of the conspirators. Id. ¶ 39. Applying the facts in the light most favorable to the State, it is clear that Culp and Lowe formed the requisite union of the minds required to conspire to commit robbery. Culp proposed the idea to rob the victims to Lowe and a group of men. Culp asked and received Lowe's assistance in preparation of the crime. There was a discussion between the two as to the best way to perform the robbery. Lowe and Culp both went together to Lowe's sister's house to retrieve the pistol that was used in the robbery. On the way back to the Amigo Mart, Culp again solicited the involvement of others in the commission of the crime. These facts display a union of the minds between Culp and Lowe.