Which statement is true about impossibility as a defense to conspiracy under NY law?

• A. Factual impossibility is never a defense
• B. Legal impossibility is a defense in NY
• C. Both are defenses
• D. Neither is addressed

Answer: (A)

Impossibility defenses don’t defeat conspiracy liability because the offense centers on the plan and the steps taken toward carrying it out, not on whether the crime could actually be completed. If two or more people agree to commit a crime and take an overt step to further that plan, they can be guilty of conspiracy even if, for some factual reason, the crime could not be finished. That’s why factual impossibility is not a defense.

So the true statement is that factual impossibility is never a defense to conspiracy. The other choices mix in defenses that aren’t recognized in this context, or assert combinations that don’t fit how conspiracy liability is treated.