State v. Gladstone
Washington Supreme Court
474 P.2d 274 (1970)
Relevant factsFree
An undercover informant, Thompson, asked to buy marijuana from Bruce Gladstone (defendant), who said he had none but suggested Thompson buy from a man named Kent, giving Thompson Kent's address and a map. Thompson then purchased marijuana from Kent, with no evidence of any communication between Gladstone and Kent. Gladstone was convicted of aiding and abetting Kent's sale of marijuana and appealed.
IssueFree
Whether mere communication to the effect that another might or probably would commit a criminal offense amounts to aiding or abetting when that offense is ultimately committed.