Practice question
A recipient deals in property acquired through the stated access-device fraud with the Section13 knowledge and gain requirements established. The recipient did not join the original plan. The prosecution proceeds solely under the accessory provision. Does lack of original conspiratorial membership alone defeat that specified charge?
- Yes, every accessory must first be a co-conspirator
- No; Section13 has its own post-fraud-dealing requirements
- Yes, later dealings are always immune
- Only the device issuer may be liable
- The property’s value is never relevant to any element
Legal references
- RA11449 Section3, amended RA8484 Section9(r); retained RA8484 Sections13 and17: https://lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra2019/ra_11449_2019.html ; https://lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra1998/ra_8484_1998.html
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.