People v. Buffum

In People v. Buffum (1953) 40 Cal.2d 709, the question presented was whether women who had obtained abortions were accomplices or coconspirators of a doctor and another man charged with conspiracy to perform them ( Pen. Code, 274), thereby requiring corroboration of their testimony. The California Supreme Court held that the Legislature, by providing a less severe punishment for a woman who voluntarily submits to an abortion ( Pen. Code, 275), expressed an intent that such persons should not be punished for conspiracy to violate section 275. The court recognized that a defendant "may be liable to prosecution for conspiracy to commit a given crime even though he is incapable of committing the crime itself." ( Id., at p. 722.) But in finding that a conspiracy conviction was inconsistent with the legislative intent, the court declared: "This rule . . . does not apply where the statutes defining the substantive offense disclose an affirmative legislative policy that the conduct of one of the parties involved shall be unpunished. ( Gebardi v. United States, 287 U.S. 112, 121-123 . . .; In re Vince, 2 N.J. 443 . . .; see Pinkerton v. United States, 328 U.S. 640, 643 . . .; State v. McLaughlin, 132 Conn. 325 . . . .) Similarly, the rule should not be applied where the Legislature singles out one of the parties for special treatment by enacting a statute which deals only with the conduct of that person and provides for a lesser punishment than is given to the other party." (Id., at pp. 722-723.)