Some acts are prohibited by law and punished one way if the person does the act, but if a certain intent is proven, the punishment can be increased. For example, arson may be one level of crime, but arson with intent to collect insurance proceeds receives a greater punishment. For this example, assume a prohibited act "X", where the punishment is increased in case the act is carried out "with intent to further another crime", which I assume is "general intent". Assume that the proven intent was "to purchase marijuana", also that the prosecuting jurisdiction is a specific state.
In Washington, purchasing marijuana is not a crime (leave aside intent to purchase illegal amounts, or intent by a minor), therefore "the act, with criminal intent" would presumably not exist and a criminal act X could not be prosecuted as higher grade X-with-criminal intent. But a person in Washington could intend to purchase marijuana in Idaho where it is illegal. Can "intent to further another crime" then include a prohibited act in another jurisdiction (so Washington charges a higher level of crime based on intent to violate Idaho law), or must it be a crime in the prosecuting jurisdiction? Can such a crime be a federal crime that has no state analog (for example federal income tax fraud), i.e. can Washington escalate the punishment based on an intent to commit a federal but not state crime?
