4th 1 (2007), is a criminal case decided by the Supreme Court of California that distinguished between solicitation and attempt.

[1]: 701–2 The prosecution appealed and the California Supreme Court reinstated the attempt charge.

[4] Due to the slight-acts rule, solicitation with the intent of murder, "in combination with a completed agreement to hire a professional killer and further conduct implementing the agreement, can similarly constitute an attempted murder.

"Although defendant's conduct went beyond the minimum required for solicitation, for purposes of attempt law his arrangements constitute mere preparation.

"[7] In "this case, neither defendant nor the supposed assassin took a direct act toward commission of the offense," so attempt cannot have occurred.