Court Opinion

ID: 9664566
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 00:21:27.619633+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:15:07.126847
License: Public Domain

LEIBSON, Justice,
dissenting in part.
Respectfully, I dissent from so much of the holding as affirms Wilson’s conviction for conspiracy.
KRS 506.110 embodies the general rule that one cannot be convicted of both a conspiracy to commit a crime and the actual crime. The underlying theory of this rule propounds that the conspiracy, being an act of preparation, merges into the completed offense. The lesser offense of conspiracy becomes a part of the larger criminal act.
The statute bars double conviction in the situation where all of the criminal objectives of the conspiracy have been consummated and received convictions. Thus, where a conspiratorial agreement contains multiple criminal objectives, KRS 506.-110(2) permits a conviction for the substantive crime and for the conspiracy if some of its objectives have not reached a conviction *893for a substantive crime. In this situation the whole conspiratorial agreement has not completely merged into convictions for the substantive criminal acts. The conspiracy, comprised of multiple objectives, remains separate and larger than the one criminal conviction.
For instance, suppose Smith & Wesson conspire to commit four robberies, but the police apprehend them after the third robbery. The defendants can be convicted of the three robberies and the conspiracy to make four robberies. If we weren’t allowed to convict of the conspiracy in this situation, then the act of agreeing to make a fourth robbery would go unpunished. However, if Smith & Wesson had successfully committed all four robberies before their arrest, we could only legitimately convict them of the four robberies and could not add on a conspiracy conviction. The conspiracy has completely merged into the commission of the four robberies. No act of preparation remains unpunished. The general rule that bars double conviction would apply in this scenario.
In the present case, assuming arguendo that the Commonwealth proved a conspiracy existed containing as multiple objectives both kidnapping and robbery, KRS 506.-110(2) does not permit a conviction of both kidnapping and robbery AND the conspiracy to kidnap and rob. All of the criminal objectives of the conspiracy have merged into the convictions for the substantive crimes. The general rule barring the double conviction should apply. Every act of preparation has merged into the commission of the crime and received a conviction. Nothing is left to punish.
All of this is explained in the Model Penal Code and Commentaries, drafted by the American Law Institute, which was the source of the Kentucky Penal Code, KRS 506.110.
COMBS, J., joins this dissent.