D approached Ragsdale in a bar and asked him if he was interesting in making some money. D told Ragsdale about a plan to rob a man. Ragsdale feigned interest at first to gather more information.
Later, Ragsdale informed police of the plot and continued to make D think he was interested.
D was arrested while attempting to commit the robbery.
Procedural History:
Trial court found D guilty of conspiracy to commit robbery.
Appellate court reversed, D not guilty.
IL Supreme Court affirmed.
Issues:
Does the IL statute require a unilateral or bilateral theory of conspiracy for conviction?
Holding/Rule:
The IL conspiracy statute requires a bilateral conspiracy in order to find a D guilty for conspiracy.
Reasoning:
The MPC embraces a unilateral theory, and our code was based upon the MPC.
However, the drafters did not seem to intend to want to abolish the old bilateral theory. There is nothing in the notes for when the change was enacted that explains the change.
IL has a solicitation statute that embraces a unilateral theory of conspiracy; the penalties are substantially the same.
The rule of construction requires that ambiguities in statutes are resolved in favor of Ds.
