Stokes v. State, 92 Miss. 415, 46 So. 627 (Miss. 1908)

Facts

  • Will Stokes had an adulterous relationship with Cora Lane, who was married to Wallace Lane.
  • Stokes and Cora agreed that Wallace Lane should be killed.
  • They arranged for a third party, “Shorty” Robertson, to ambush and shoot Wallace Lane as he returned home at night along a customary route.
  • Robertson reported the plan to law enforcement, who set up surveillance near the intended ambush site.
  • Stokes accompanied Robertson to the location and handed Robertson a loaded gun intended for the killing.
  • Police intervened and arrested Stokes before any shooting occurred.
  • No payment had yet been made to Robertson for the planned killing.
  • On the planned night, Wallace Lane did not travel the expected route and never came within range.

Issues

  1. Whether Stokes’s conduct constituted an attempt to commit murder, rather than mere preparation, where he arranged for a killing, went to the ambush site, and delivered a loaded firearm to the would-be killer.
  2. Whether factual impossibility (the victim’s failure to appear) negates liability for attempted murder.
  3. Whether the absence of payment to the hired killer prevents an attempt conviction.

Decision

  • The Supreme Court of Mississippi affirmed the conviction for attempted murder.
  • The court held that Stokes’s actions went beyond preparation and were sufficiently proximate to the intended homicide.
  • The court rejected factual impossibility as a defense where the defendant acted with intent to kill and took direct steps toward completion.
  • The court treated nonpayment as immaterial given the agreement and the overt acts at the scene.
  • An attempt requires specific intent to commit the target offense plus overt acts directly connected to its commission that go beyond mere preparation.
  • Completion of the crime is not required; failure due to external circumstances does not defeat attempt liability once the defendant’s conduct reaches dangerous proximity to the offense.
  • Factual impossibility (e.g., the intended victim does not appear) is not a defense to attempt when the defendant intends the crime and proceeds as if completion is possible.
  • Liability for attempt does not depend on finishing incidental aspects of the plan (such as paying consideration) when substantial execution steps have been taken.

Conclusion

The court upheld Stokes’s attempted-murder conviction because his agreement to have Wallace Lane killed, his presence at the planned ambush site, and his delivery of a loaded gun to the intended shooter constituted an attempt; the victim’s nonappearance and the lack of payment did not bar liability.