Also known as: overt act · overt-act
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
An act performed in furtherance of a conspiracy or attempt that exceeds mere preparation.
Olga O'Neill and Ophelia O'Brien met and agreed to falsify insurance claims for personal gain. They formed the plan with full criminal intent but took no further steps before arrest. The agreement itself satisfied the elements of conspiracy under the traditional common law rule.
Orson Ochoa and Onyx O'Reilly agreed to commit a third-degree felony by altering billing records. They discussed the plan but performed no further act. The prosecution could not secure a conviction without proving an overt act by one of them.
Omar Olson purchased materials and drove to the site of a planned arson. Police stopped him before he exited the vehicle or approached the target building. The conduct remained too remote from completion to qualify as an overt act under the proximity test.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Olive Okafor mixed a harmful substance and carried it toward the target location with intent to poison livestock. She later changed her mind and discarded the mixture. The prior overt act prevented any defense of abandonment to the attempt charge.
Optima Health executives reached an agreement to submit false regulatory filings. They formed the plan with criminal intent but performed no additional steps. The conspiracy was complete upon the agreement without any overt act requirement.
Orchard Farms managers agreed to falsify safety reports and one later created a draft document. Another participant then attempted to withdraw from the plan. The completed overt act prevented withdrawal from serving as a defense to conspiracy.
No. The agreement itself supplies the actus reus under the traditional common law definition. The prosecution need not prove any additional overt act in furtherance of the plan.
The Model Penal Code requires proof of an overt act for any conspiracy other than a felony of the first or second degree. The act must be performed by the defendant or a co-conspirator.
Yes. Once the defendant has crossed the line from preparation to an overt act with the required intent, abandonment supplies no defense under the majority common law rule.
The act must come dangerously close to completing the substantive offense under the traditional proximity test. Conduct that leaves substantial steps undone remains insufficient.
…233. On the other hand, the Court has rejected challenges under the Free Exercise Clause to governmental regulation of certain overt acts prompted by religious beliefs or principles, for "even when the action is in accord with one's religious convictions, [it] is not totally free from legislative restrictions." Braunfeld v.…