The Court found that there was no evidence produced at trial to suggest there was an agreement between Mr. Lane and another to kill the victim. There was insufficient evidence to support a conviction for conspiracy. Simply because Lane was present with another, and that person was quiet and did not interfere after the shooting, and left with the Mr. Lane was not enough to support a finding of conspiracy.
Mere knowledge, acquiescence, or approval of the act, without cooperation or agreement to cooperate, is not enough to constitute one a party to a conspiracy. There must be intentional participation in the transaction with a view to the furtherance of the common design and purpose. Solomon v. State.
However, the conviction for first degree murder is affirmed.