In our case, there was not really a party that sold a drug, or stole a drug and transferred it, as defendants 2 and 3 believed. Their agreement with defendant 1 and with Muhammad was that they would all be on the same "side" to the deal. In any case, the conspiracy they concocted should not be regarded as any "other transaction" but rather as a "conspiracy" to commit a crime, which defendants 2 and 3 believed to be a conspiracy to obtain a prohibited drug by way of theft.
Since no drug was received, the defense attorney is correct that the actions of defendants 2 and 3 should not be seen as an act beyond an attempt to obtain the same drug, in the context of the relationship with Muhammad and defendant 1.
Given that the indictment from the outset attributed only assistance to Defendant 3, and as described above, his entire arrival is only an "appendix" to Defendant 2, it would be incorrect to convict him of an offense that is beyond assistance.
Therefore, as suggested by the defense attorney, in accordance with the provision of section 34J(a) of the Penal Law, defendants 2 and 3 should be convicted, according to their confession of conspiracy and attempted to commit an offense. The degree of their responsibility as someone who conspired to commit the offense of possession of dangerous drugs, in the value of 50 hydro cannabis provident funds, should be considered to be defendant 2 as someone who tried to commit the same offense, and defendant 3 as someone who assisted defendant 2 in attempting to commit the same offense.
The offense of possession of drugs other than for self-consumption in relation to Defendant 3
In section 21 of the indictment, it was noted that on July 2, 2019, at the time of the arrest of defendant 3, a dangerous cannabis-type drug weighing 68.30 grams net was found in his home, and he was asked to convict him of the offense of possession of a drug not for personal consumption. Evidence in this regard was presented with the consent of the defense and there is no dispute between the parties that it gave proof.