5th Cir. Pattern Jury Instr. (Criminal) 2.97

21 U.S.C. § 846

Title 21, United States Code, Section 846, makes it a crime for anyone to conspire with

someone else to commit a violation of certain controlled substances laws of the United States. In

this case, the defendant is charged with conspiring to ___________________ (describe the object

of the conspiracy as alleged in the indictment, e.g., possess with intent to distribute a controlled

substance, and give elements of object crime unless they are given under a different count of the

indictment).

A “conspiracy” is an agreement between two or more persons to join together to

accomplish some unlawful purpose. It is a kind of “partnership in crime” in which each member

becomes the agent of every other member.

__________________ (name controlled substance ) is a controlled substance within the

meaning of federal law.

For you to find the defendant guilty of this crime, you must be convinced that the

government has proved each of the following beyond a reasonable doubt:

First: That two or more persons, directly or indirectly, reached an agreement to

___________________ (describe the object of the conspiracy);

Second: That the defendant knew of the unlawful purpose of the agreement; and

Third: That the defendant joined in the agreement willfully, that is, with the intent to further

its unlawful purpose.

[Fourth: That the overall scope of the conspiracy involved at least ___________________

(describe quantity) of ___________________ (name controlled substance), and

Fifth: That the defendant knew or reasonably should have known that the scope of the

conspiracy involved at least ___________________ ( describe quantity ) of

___________________ (name controlled substance).]

One may become a member of a conspiracy without knowing all the details of the unlawful

scheme or the identities of all the other alleged conspirators. If a defendant understands the

unlawful nature of a plan or scheme and knowingly and intentionally joins in that plan or scheme

on one occasion, that is sufficient to convict him [her] for conspiracy even though the defendant

had not participated before and even though the defendant played only a minor part.

The government need not prove that the alleged conspirators entered into any formal

agreement, nor that they directly stated between themselves all the details of the scheme. Similarly,

the government need not prove that all of the details of the scheme alleged in the indictment were

480

actually agreed upon or carried out, nor must it prove that all of the persons alleged to have been

members of the conspiracy were such, or that the alleged conspirators actually succeeded in

accomplishing their unlawful objectives.

Mere presence at the scene of an event, even with knowledge that a crime is being

committed, or the mere fact that certain persons may have associated with each other and may

have assembled together and discussed common aims and interests, does not necessarily establish

proof of the existence of a conspiracy. A person who has no knowledge of a conspiracy, but who

happens to act in a way that advances some purpose of a conspiracy, does not thereby become a

conspirator.