D and 3 others planned to rob a man of his payroll when he walked it to his business from the bank one day. D claimed to be able to identify the man carrying the money.
They rode around for a long time looking for the man; eventually, they were followed by police. The men jumped out of the car, and the police arrested them.
D never saw the man carrying the payroll. D was charged with attempted robbery.
Procedural History:
Trial court found D guilty of attempt to commit robbery.
NY COA reversed, D not guilty.
Issues:
When Ds have every intention of committing a crime but are unable to because the object of their crime cannot be found, does an action lie in attempt?
Holding/Rule:
Even when Ds have every intention of committing a crime, if they are unable to do so because the object of their crime cannot be found, an action in attempt does not lie.
Reasoning:
In attempt, there must be dangerous proximity to success. They must be very near to the accomplishment of the crime.
The actions here did not come so near the commission of a robbery that there was reasonable likelihood of success but for the interference.
The Ds had planned to commit a crime and were looking for the opportunity, but the opportunity never came.
