Can a defendant be found guilty of murder as a direct aider and abettor?

Hubbard rejected both of these arguments. The opinion holds there was substantial evidence the murders were committed under circumstances constituting lying in wait and, as to defendant's CALJIC No. 8.80.1 assignment of error, that it was forfeited and meritless anyway because there was substantial evidence defendant and her conspirators were major participants who acted with reckless indifference to human life. Hubbard does not decide, however, whether there was evidence that would support finding defendant guilty of murder as a direct aider and abettor. (See generally People v. McCoy (2001) 25 Cal.4th 1111, 1118 [a direct aider and abettor "must know and share the murderous intent of the actual perpetrator"].)

Page 4