Legal Definitions - concert-of-action rule

The concert-of-action rule is a legal principle that prevents individuals from being charged with conspiracy when the crime they are accused of inherently requires the participation of two or more people. The rationale behind this rule is that the agreement to commit such a crime is an essential element of the crime itself. Therefore, charging conspiracy in addition to the substantive crime would amount to punishing the same agreement twice for the same core conduct. This rule typically applies when only the minimum number of participants required for the substantive offense are involved.

Here are some examples to illustrate the concert-of-action rule:

• Illegal Dueling: Imagine two individuals, Alex and Ben, agree to meet in a secluded area to engage in an illegal duel, a crime in their jurisdiction. The act of dueling, by its very nature, requires at least two participants who mutually agree to fight. Under the concert-of-action rule, Alex and Ben would likely be charged with the crime of illegal dueling itself, but not with conspiracy to duel. The agreement to duel is an intrinsic part of the dueling offense, and charging them with both the duel and conspiracy to duel would be considered redundant punishment for the same essential agreement.

• Bribery: Consider a scenario where a local business owner, Carol, offers a significant sum of money to a city council member, David, in exchange for David's vote on a lucrative zoning change. The crime of bribery, specifically the act of offering and accepting a bribe, inherently requires both a person offering the bribe and a person accepting it. If Carol and David are the only parties involved in this illicit exchange, the concert-of-action rule would likely prevent them from also being charged with conspiracy to commit bribery. Their agreement to exchange money for a vote is fundamental to the bribery offense itself.

• Illegal Gambling Operation: Suppose a bookmaker, Emily, regularly accepts bets on sporting events from a gambler, Frank, in a jurisdiction where such activities are illegal. The specific crime of illegal gambling, particularly the act of taking a bet, necessitates both an individual placing the bet and an individual accepting it. If the authorities apprehend Emily and Frank solely for their direct transactions, the concert-of-action rule would typically preclude charging them with conspiracy to engage in illegal gambling. The "concert of action" – the agreement to place and accept bets – is an inherent component of the illegal gambling offense itself.