美国刑法9.Attempt-Preparation v. Attempt.docx

Attempt-Preparation v. AttemptEagleton(England 1855):Old Rule: Take the last step which he was able to take along the road of his criminal intentBefore the final step, there is still possibility to abandon or renounce.Applying this rule: even when the actor presents the pistol at the victim, it is not attempt. Only when he pulls the trigger, it is attempt.?White(England 1910):Rejected the Eagleton test.The court held that the first administration of poison in a case of intended slow poisoning by repeated doses amounted in itself to attempted murder.A series of acts: the beginning of the series of acts can be the beginning of the attempt.?Note for history: Although the Eagleton test has been rejected, no definite substitute for it has been formulated.Some points: The first step along the way of criminal intent is not necessarily sufficient and the final step is not necessarily required.No clear guidance to draw such a line between the two extremes.?Rizzo(N.Y. 1927):Facts: D planned to rob a man of a pay roll. D and his co-felons were looking for the man in a vehicle , but they had not discovered or seen the man up to the time they were arrested.Issue: whether the steps D had taken up to the time of his arrest amounted to an attempt to commit robberyReasoning:The Penal Law； An act, done with intent to commit a crime, and tending but failing to effect its commission, is an attempt to commit that crime.The word tending is very indefinite.Rule: consider those acts only as tending to the commission of the crime which are so near to its accomplishment that in all reasonable probability the crime itself would have been committed, but for timely interference. —— dangerous proximity(immediate nearness)Holding: D was not guilty of an attempt to commit robbery when they had not found or reached the presence of the person they intended to rob.?Bell(Mass. 2009): apply the Rizzo courts dangerous-proximity approachConvicted of attempted rape, reversedImportant facts: Never see the