## Facts

- Two men robbed, at gunpoint, a cashier working at the office of the *Courier Post*.
- The State of New Jersey charged Thomas Hughes with robbery, possession of a weapon for an unlawful purpose, and conspiracy to commit robbery.
- At trial, Hughes testified that before the robbery Tyrone Wolley approached him several times about participating in a robbery of the *Courier Post*, and that Hughes rejected Wolley’s efforts.
- A police detective testified that Hughes had informed police of Wolley’s attempts to recruit him, and that Hughes reported he had rejected those attempts.
- Hughes requested a jury instruction on the statutory affirmative defense of “renunciation of purpose” to conspiracy.
- The trial judge denied the request.
- The jury convicted Hughes of conspiracy and was unable to reach a verdict on the robbery and weapons charges.
- Hughes appealed.

## Issues

1. Was Hughes entitled to a jury instruction on the affirmative defense of renunciation of purpose to conspiracy based on evidence that he rejected recruitment efforts and alerted police before the robbery?
2. Did the jury’s inability to reach verdicts on the robbery and weapons charges require reversal of the conspiracy conviction?

## Decision

- The Appellate Division affirmed Hughes’s conspiracy conviction.
- The court held the renunciation instruction was properly denied because renunciation under N.J.S.A. 2C:5-2(e) presupposes that the defendant actually entered into the conspiracy; Hughes’s trial position was that he never joined an agreement to rob.
- The court upheld the conspiracy verdict even though the jury deadlocked on the substantive counts, concluding the lack of verdicts on robbery and weapon possession did not negate the conspiracy finding.

## Legal Principles

- A defendant is entitled to an instruction on an affirmative defense only when there is evidence in the record that, if believed, would satisfy each element of the defense.
- Renunciation of conspiracy under N.J.S.A. 2C:5-2(e) applies only after a conspiracy has been formed and requires proof, among other things, of a complete and voluntary abandonment coupled with timely steps to prevent the crime (including appropriate notice to law enforcement consistent with the statute’s requirements).
- A defendant who defends on the ground that he never agreed to commit the offense is not entitled to a renunciation instruction, because the defense is directed to withdrawal after participation, not denial of participation.
- A conspiracy conviction is not automatically invalid because the jury fails to return verdicts on related substantive offenses; conspiracy is a separate offense with separate elements.

## Conclusion

In *New Jersey v. Hughes*, the Appellate Division affirmed a conspiracy conviction where the defendant claimed he never joined the plan and therefore was not entitled to a renunciation-of-purpose instruction; the court also ruled that the jury’s deadlock on the robbery and weapons counts did not bar the conspiracy verdict.


New Jersey v. Hughes, 521 A.2d 1295, 215 N.J. Super 295 (1986)