What must be shown for a conviction of conspiracy under most states' laws?

For a conviction of conspiracy under most states' laws, it must be shown that there was an agreement between two or more people to commit a crime along with the commission of an overt act in furtherance of that agreement. The requirement for an agreement establishes that there was a mutual understanding or commitment to engage in the criminal activity, which is essential to establishing the collective intent of the parties involved.

The overt act requirement, while not necessarily being itself criminal, demonstrates that the conspirators took some step toward the completion of the conspiracy’s objective, which punishes mere agreement as a form of criminal activity. This two-pronged approach underscores the notion that conspiracy is not merely about intent but requires some action taken towards the criminal goal.

The other options focus on requirements that are not standard in proving conspiracy. For instance, a written contract and witnesses are not necessary for a conspiracy conviction since conspiracies often operate in secrecy. Similarly, a plea agreement and a confession pertain to other aspects of criminal procedure and do not constitute the foundational elements needed to establish a conspiracy charge. Finally, only showing intent to commit a crime ignores the critical element of an overt act, which is essential to the conspiracy framework in most jurisdictions. Thus, the correct answer properly reflects the legal standards