Short answer. Usually no. Under the Revised Penal Code an agreement to commit a felony is punished by itself only where a specific article says conspiring to commit that particular crime is an offence. Where no such provision exists, the agreement alone is not a charge.
What the law says
Conspiracy and proposal to commit felony are punishable only in the cases in which the law specially provides a penalty therefor.
Revised Penal Code, Article 8 — Conspiracy And Proposal. Read the full provision →
What the law says
A conspiracy exists when two or more persons come to an agreement concerning the commission of a felony and decide to commit it.
Revised Penal Code, Article 8 — Conspiracy And Proposal. Read the full provision →
Agreeing is a crime only where a particular article says so
The provision begins with a limit rather than with an offence: conspiracy and proposal to commit felony are punishable only in the cases in which the law specially provides a penalty therefor. The Code therefore does not punish agreement as a general matter. Unless some particular article makes conspiring to commit that particular felony an offence in itself, an agreement that produced nothing is not a charge under this provision. That is the opposite of what most readers arrive expecting, because conspiracy is spoken of loosely, as though any plan between two people were already punishable. Under the Code it is the narrow exception.
What the Code counts as a conspiracy
The definition is tight: a conspiracy exists when two or more persons come to an agreement concerning the commission of a felony and decide to commit it. Two things are required, and the second does most of the work. There must be an agreement about committing a felony, and there must be a decision to commit it. Angry talk, a plan turned over and dropped, or one person's private intention shared with nobody does not answer that description. Whether a group crossed from discussion into decision is a question of evidence, and it is normally contested rather than obvious from the words alone.
The crimes where the agreement itself is punished
Where the Code does punish the bare agreement, it says so in the article defining the crime. Conspiracy and proposal to commit coup d'etat, rebellion or insurrection are covered by Art. 136, and conspiracy to commit sedition by Art. 141; treason carries a comparable provision of its own. These are offences against the State, and the reasoning behind them is that waiting for such a plan to be carried out would be waiting too long. The penalties and fines stated in those articles were revised by later legislation, so the figures printed in older copies of the Code should not be relied on.
If the plan was in fact carried out, the question changes
None of this helps once the felony has actually been committed. At that point conspiracy is not charged as a separate offence at all; it becomes the reason each participant answers for the crime that resulted, including one who did not perform the act himself. So the facts that matter are what was agreed, when if ever the group decided, and whether anything was done to carry it out. If you are being questioned about a plan that went nowhere, the words actually used and the point at which someone pulled out are what a lawyer will want to see first.
Related provisions
- Revised Penal Code, Article 8 — Conspiracy And Proposal
- Revised Penal Code, Article 136 — Conspiracy To Commit Rebellion