Reference no: EM133812528

Question

Brian and Yvette are seniors at the Tates Creek High School in the Commonwealth of Kentucky. They were arrested last week while playing soccer in the neighboring parking lot of Henry Clay High School. Two other Tates Creek Students, Vic and Hal, were arrested at the same time. Vic and Hal were caught exiting the locked building of Henry Clay in possession of crowbars and several soccer championship trophies stolen from the school's display cases. Neither Vic nor Hal implicated Brian or Yvette in the burglary. Nonetheless, the Commonwealth is seeking to prosecute Brian and Yvette for criminal conspiracy to commit burglary based on the following pieces of circumstantial evidence: i. Brian and Yvette are Vic and Hal's classmates at Tates Creek and were present at the scene of the crime where Vic and Hal were arrested. ii. Tates Creek and Henry Clay are soccer league rivals. The annual game between the two schools happened the night after the burglary took place. The Commonwealth is advancing the theory that Brian and Yvette were "standing watch" for Vic and Hal. Given the current state of law, is merely being present at the scene of a crime sufficient for a conspiracy conviction?