of the crime” -without being “present at the commission of the offense.” Tolley v. Commonwealth, 216 Va. 341, 348, 218 S.E.2d 550, 555 (1975). Plainly, it is possible to incite, advise, or abet in the commission of a crime without at the same time having agreed to commit such crime. As the United States Supreme Court has stated, “[a]iding, abetting, and counseling are not terms which presuppose the existence of an agreement. Those terms have a broader application, making the defendant a principal when he consciously shares in a criminal act, regardless of the existence of a conspiracy.” Pereira, 347 U.S. at 11, 74 S.Ct. at 364. Thus, murder, even when committed as an accessory before the fact, does not require proof of an agreement. See also Ramsey, 2 Va.App. at 272, 343 S.E.2d at 470 (<HOLDING>). Because the charged murder and conspiracy
recognizing that felony and misdemeanor dwi are separate offenses because a prior conviction is an essential element of felony driving while intoxicated but it is not an element of the misdemeanor offense holding that reversal of conviction for felony murder was required where jury failed to find the defendant guilty of the underlying felony as essential element of the felony murder offense holding that for facilitation of a felony the state must prove the commission of a specified felony and the assistance the accused gave to the person committing the specified felony holding that a prior nonarizona conviction to be used as a prior felony conviction under the statute must both be for an offense that would constitute a felony in arizona and be classified as a felony in the other jurisdiction holding that proof of an agreement to commit a felony is not a necessary element in a conviction for the commission of the felony