Can I be convicted of conspiracy if nothing happened?

Yes. The agreement itself is the offence. Section 465 does not require any step toward carrying out the plan, which is why conspiracy charges are laid where police intervene before the substantive offence occurs.

Can I be convicted if I only knew about the plan?

No. Knowledge of a plan, presence when it is discussed, or even approval of it is not enough. The Crown must prove an actual agreement to participate and an intention to put the common design into effect.

How does the Carter rule work?

Under R. v. Carter, the trier of fact must first find on the balance of probabilities, using only evidence directly admissible against the accused, that the accused was a member of the conspiracy. Only then can the acts and declarations of co-conspirators made in furtherance of the conspiracy be used against them.

Specialized Prosecutions

Conspiracy Lawyer in Canada

A conspiracy lawyer defends charges under Criminal Code, s. 465. This page sets out what the offence covers, what the Crown must prove, the penalties on conviction and the defences that are commonly available, then lists criminal defence firms you can contact.

Criminal Code, s. 465·indictable offence

What Conspiracy covers in Canadian criminal law

Conspiracy under section 465 of the Criminal Code is an agreement between two or more people to commit an indictable offence. The offence is complete on the agreement. Nothing needs to be done to carry the plan out, and the substantive offence need never occur.

The Crown must prove both an intention to agree and an intention to put the common design into effect. Mere knowledge of a plan, or presence when it is discussed, does not make a person a conspirator; there must be an actual agreement to participate.

Conspiracy trials have distinctive evidentiary rules. Under the co-conspirators' exception to the hearsay rule, as set out in R. v. Carter, acts and declarations of one conspirator in furtherance of the conspiracy can be used against another, but only after the trier of fact is satisfied on the balance of probabilities that the accused was a member of the conspiracy on evidence directly admissible against them.

What the Crown must prove

The Crown carries the burden of proving every element beyond a reasonable doubt. A reasonable doubt on any one of them means an acquittal.

An agreement between two or more persons
That the agreement was to commit an indictable offence
An intention to agree, on the part of each conspirator
An intention to put the common design into effect
Membership of the particular accused in the conspiracy charged, not some other agreement

Penalties and consequences on conviction

The same maximum punishment as the offence that was the object of the conspiracy, under section 465(1)
Penitentiary sentences in drug and firearms conspiracies
Forfeiture and proceeds-of-crime applications
A criminal record with serious immigration consequences
Lengthy pre-trial custody, since multi-accused conspiracies take years to reach trial

Common defences

No agreement, only parallel conduct or a discussion that never crystallised
The accused was a member of a different agreement than the one charged, which is fatal to the count
Withdrawal from the conspiracy communicated to the co-conspirators before the offence
Challenging the Carter application, so that co-conspirator declarations cannot be used
Section 8 Charter challenges to wiretap authorisations under Part VI of the Criminal Code
Section 11(b) delay, which is a serious issue in large multi-accused prosecutions

Conspiracy lawyer: frequently asked questions

Can I be convicted of conspiracy if nothing happened?: Yes. The agreement itself is the offence. Section 465 does not require any step toward carrying out the plan, which is why conspiracy charges are laid where police intervene before the substantive offence occurs.
Can I be convicted if I only knew about the plan?: No. Knowledge of a plan, presence when it is discussed, or even approval of it is not enough. The Crown must prove an actual agreement to participate and an intention to put the common design into effect.
How does the Carter rule work?: Under R. v. Carter, the trier of fact must first find on the balance of probabilities, using only evidence directly admissible against the accused, that the accused was a member of the conspiracy. Only then can the acts and declarations of co-conspirators made in furtherance of the conspiracy be used against them.

Find a conspiracy lawyer

These criminal defence firms handle Criminal Code matters and can advise on Conspiracy charges. Confirm the scope of a firm’s practice before retaining counsel.