CALCRIM No. 563

(The defendant[s]/Defendant[s] <insert name[s]>) (is/are)

charged [in Count] with conspiracy to commit first degree

murder [in violation of Penal Code section 182].

To prove that (the/a) defendant is guilty of this crime, the People must

prove that:

1. The defendant intended to agree and did agree with [one or more

of] (the other defendant[s]/ [or] <insert name[s] or

description[s] of coparticipant[s]>) to intentionally and unlawfully

kill;

2. At the time of the agreement, the defendant and [one or more of]

the other alleged member[s] of the conspiracy intended that one

or more of them would intentionally and unlawfully kill;

3. (The/One of the) defendant[s][,] [or <insert name[s]

or description[s] of coparticipant[s]>][,] [or (both/all) of them]

committed [at least one of] the following overt act[s] alleged to

accomplish the killing: <insert the alleged overt

acts>;

3. AND

4. (At least one of these/This) overt act[s] was committed in

California.

To decide whether (the/a) defendant committed (this/these) overt act[s],

consider all of the evidence presented about the overt act[s].

To decide whether (the/a) defendant and [one or more of] the other

alleged member[s] of the conspiracy intended to commit murder in the

first degree, please refer to Instructions 520 (First or Second Degree

Murder With Malice Aforethought) and 521 (First Degree Murder) which

define that crime.

When deciding whether (the/a) defendant and [one or more of] the other

alleged member[s] of the conspiracy intended to commit murder in the

first degree, do not consider implied malice. Conspiracy to commit

murder requires an intent to kill.

The People must prove that the members of the alleged conspiracy had

an agreement and intent to commit murder. The People do not have to

prove that any of the members of the alleged conspiracy actually met or

came to a detailed or formal agreement to commit that crime. An

agreement may be inferred from conduct if you conclude that members

of the alleged conspiracy acted with a common purpose to commit the

crime.

An overt act is an act by one or more of the members of the conspiracy

that is done to help accomplish the agreed upon crime. The overt act

must happen after the defendant has agreed to commit the crime. The

overt act must be more than the act of agreeing or planning to commit

the crime, but it does not have to be a criminal act itself.

[Y ou must all agree that at least one alleged overt act was committed in

California by at least one alleged member of the conspiracy, but you do

not have to all agree on which specific overt act or acts were committed

or who committed the overt act or acts.]

[Y ou must make a separate decision as to whether each defendant was a

member of the alleged conspiracy.]

[A member of a conspiracy does not have to personally know the identity

or roles of all the other members.]

<Give when evidence of group membership is used to prove the conspiracy.>

[Someone who merely accompanies or associates with members of a

conspiracy but who does not intend to commit the murder is not a

member of the conspiracy.]

[Evidence that a person did an act or made a statement that helped

accomplish the goal of the conspiracy is not enough, by itself, to prove

that the person was a member of the conspiracy.]

New January 2006; Revised August 2006, April 2010, February 2014, September

2020, September 2023