726 P.2d 1105 (1986)
Petitioner was convicted of first-degree murder and conspiracy to commit first-degree murder. Petitioner had planned on murdering the victim. With the help of two others, petitioner carried out the plan. Each of the perpetrators was tried in separate proceedings. Petitioner's two accomplices were both acquitted of the conspiracy charge.
- On appeal, petitioner argued that he could not properly be convicted of conspiracy after his cohorts had been acquitted.
- The court held that in light of the position of the majority of jurisdictions, the rule of consistency was inapplicable where all the alleged co-conspirators were not tried in the same proceeding.
- Since there was a multiplicity of factors that could lead to different results in separate proceedings, there was no inherent inconsistency when different juries returned different verdicts in separate trials.
The court affirmed the judgment sustaining petitioner's conviction, because the rule of consistency did not apply where all the alleged co-conspirators were tried in separate proceedings.
Recommended Supplements for Criminal Law