Inchoate Crimes
Inchoate Crimes
Attempt, conspiracy, and solicitation as distinct intent-plus-conduct structures.
Structured Visual
Jurisdiction: US; as of 2026-08-28; not legal advice; Render structure, refuse interpretation, cite, abstain, and hand off.
RENDER STRUCTURE · REFUSE INTERPRETATION · CITE · ABSTAIN · HAND-OFF: render structure, refuse interpretation, cite provenance, abstain when unsupported, and hand off to human review.
Scope and honesty note
Jurisdiction: Texas statutory anchors with United States and Model Penal Code doctrine explained comparatively; as of 2026-08-28; criminal statutes, defenses, charging, burdens, and precedent vary; synthetic facts are classroom inputs; not legal advice. Render structure, refuse unsupported guilt or defense conclusions, cite, abstain, and hand off.
See the essential structure first
Start with this deliberately incomplete structure, then use the pinned authorities, worked application, exceptions, and handoff below. This deliberately incomplete preview has 5 nodes; exceptions and legal consequences remain in the sourced prose below.
Jurisdiction: US; as of 2026-08-28; not legal advice; Render structure, refuse interpretation, cite, abstain, and hand off.
RENDER STRUCTURE · REFUSE INTERPRETATION · CITE · ABSTAIN · HAND-OFF: render structure, refuse interpretation, cite provenance, abstain when unsupported, and hand off to human review.
Begin with criminal-law doctrine
Inchoate offenses punish defined steps toward or coordination around another offense, but attempt, conspiracy, and solicitation are not interchangeable. Texas attempt uses specific intent plus an act amounting to more than mere preparation that tends but fails to effect the intended offense. This is the controlling Texas formulation; the Model Penal Code substantial-step approach is a comparative doctrine and must not be substituted. Texas conspiracy requires intent, agreement, and an overt act. Texas solicitation requires the covered intent and communicative inducement, with its stated corroboration rule.
Criminal attempt
Texas attempt requires specific intent and an act amounting to more than mere preparation that tends but fails to complete the intended offense. Verbatim statutory text: “Tex. Penal Code Sec. 15.01. CRIMINAL ATTEMPT. (a) A person commits an offense if, with specific intent to commit an offense, he does an act amounting to more than mere preparation that tends but fails to effect the commission of the offense intended. (b) If a person attempts an offense that may be aggravated, his conduct constitutes an attempt to commit the aggravated offense if an element that aggravates the offense accompanies the attempt. (c) It is no defense to prosecution for criminal attempt that the offense attempted was actually committed. (d) Except as provided by Subsection (e), an offense under this section is one category lower than the offense attempted, and if the offense attempted is a state jail felony, the offense is a Class A misdemeanor. (e) If the offense attempted is capital murder of a peace officer under Section 19.03(a)(1), the offense is a felony of the first degree, punishable by imprisonment in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice for life or for any term of not more than 99 years or less than 25 years.” Source: Tex. Penal Code § 15.01; https://www.neochart.com/catalog/texas/penal/chapter_15/section_15_01/tex_pe_15_01_d06215ab7f30/tex_penal_code_sec_15_01_criminal_attempt_0001/index.html; data via neochart.com, snapshot 2026-08.
Criminal conspiracy
Texas conspiracy requires intent that a felony be committed, agreement, and an overt act in pursuance of the agreement. Verbatim statutory text: “Tex. Penal Code Sec. 15.02. CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY. (a) A person commits criminal conspiracy if, with intent that a felony be committed: (1) he agrees with one or more persons that they or one or more of them engage in conduct that would constitute the offense; and (2) he or one or more of them performs an overt act in pursuance of the agreement. (b) An agreement constituting a conspiracy may be inferred from acts of the parties. (c) It is no defense to prosecution for criminal conspiracy that: (1) one or more of the coconspirators is not criminally responsible for the object offense; (2) one or more of the coconspirators has been acquitted, so long as two or more coconspirators have not been acquitted; (3) one or more of the coconspirators has not been prosecuted or convicted, has been convicted of a different offense, or is immune from prosecution; (4) the actor belongs to a class of persons that by definition of the object offense is legally incapable of committing the object offense in an individual capacity; or (5) the object offense was actually committed. (d) An offense under this section is one category lower than the most serious felony that is the object of the conspiracy, and if the most serious felony that is the object of the conspiracy is a state jail felony, the offense is a Class A misdemeanor. This subsection does not apply to an offense under Section 76.02.” Source: Tex. Penal Code § 15.02; https://www.neochart.com/catalog/texas/penal/chapter_15/section_15_02/tex_pe_15_02_8adb83bdbf78/tex_penal_code_sec_15_02_criminal_conspiracy_0001/index.html; data via neochart.com, snapshot 2026-08.
Criminal solicitation
Texas solicitation requires the specified intent and a request, command, or attempted inducement involving the statutorily covered felony class. Verbatim statutory text: “Tex. Penal Code Sec. 15.03. CRIMINAL SOLICITATION. (a) A person commits an offense if, with intent that a capital felony or felony of the first degree be committed, he requests, commands, or attempts to induce another to engage in specific conduct that, under the circumstances surrounding his conduct as the actor believes them to be, would constitute the felony or make the other a party to its commission. (b) A person may not be convicted under this section on the uncorroborated testimony of the person allegedly solicited and unless the solicitation is made under circumstances strongly corroborative of both the solicitation itself and the actor's intent that the other person act on the solicitation. (c) It is no defense to prosecution under this section that: (1) the person solicited is not criminally responsible for the felony solicited; (2) the person solicited has been acquitted, has not been prosecuted or convicted, has been convicted of a different offense or of a different type or class of offense, or is immune from prosecution; (3) the actor belongs to a class of persons that by definition of the felony solicited is legally incapable of committing the offense in an individual capacity; or (4) the felony solicited was actually committed. (d) An offense under this section is: (1) a felony of the first degree if the offense solicited is a capital offense; or (2) a felony of the second degree if the offense solicited is a felony of the first degree.” Source: Tex. Penal Code § 15.03; https://www.neochart.com/catalog/texas/penal/chapter_15/section_15_03/tex_pe_15_03_d0d4be2bcd84/tex_penal_code_sec_15_03_criminal_solicitation_0001/index.html; data via neochart.com, snapshot 2026-08.
Pin the synthetic facts
Three synthetic scenarios isolate preparation and entry, agreement and tool purchase, and request plus corroboration. Messages, location data, purchase records, abandonment facts, and contrary explanations remain source-linked.
Work the element application
The attempt branch asks whether the entry act exceeds mere preparation and tends toward the specifically intended offense; it does not label all preparation a substantial step. The conspiracy branch separately proves intent, agreement, and overt act. The solicitation branch tests the object-offense class, request, intent, believed circumstances, and corroboration. Completion and grading are handled from each pinned statute.
Read the populated offense record
The inchoate-offense matrix contains target offense, offense grade, required intent, conduct threshold, agreement, overt act, communication, corroboration, completion status, abandonment evidence, defenses, grading, and unresolved proof for each separate path. The record contains 14 populated rows.
Jurisdiction: US; as of 2026-08-28; not legal advice; Render structure, refuse interpretation, cite, abstain, and hand off.
RENDER STRUCTURE · REFUSE INTERPRETATION · CITE · ABSTAIN · HAND-OFF: render structure, refuse interpretation, cite provenance, abstain when unsupported, and hand off to human review.
Read the complete record
The complete record keeps sources, stated facts, and questions for review separate. Pinned sources: Verbatim snapshot authority. Tex. Penal Code § 15.01: Criminal attempt. Tex. Penal Code § 15.02: Criminal conspiracy. Tex. Penal Code § 15.03: Criminal solicitation. Synthetic facts: Classroom facts only. Attempt scenario: Person studies a store, brings tools, enters after closing, then leaves before reaching inventory. Agreement scenario: Two messages discuss a felony and one participant buys a tool identified in the discussion. Request scenario: Person asks another to carry out a specifically described serious felony; corroborating records are disputed. Element trace: Questions, evidence pointers, and bounded comparisons. Attempt: Intended offense, specific intent, act beyond mere preparation, tendency toward commission, failure, grading. Conspiracy: Felony object, intent, agreement, participants, overt act, inference evidence, grading. Solicitation: Covered object offense, intent, request command or attempted inducement, believed circumstances, corroboration, grading. Separation: Completion, merger, impossibility, withdrawal, renunciation, defenses, and grading depend on governing law.
Narrow summary
Keep attempt, conspiracy, and solicitation on separate statutory traces and use Texas's more-than-mere-preparation wording for Texas attempt.