Can a defendant who aided and abetted a crime be held liable for the crime committed in the same circumstances?

Aiding and abetting is a distinct theory of homicide. Unlike the felony-murder theory, the question of guilt as an aider and abettor is one of legal causation. "Thus, the ultimate factual question is whether the perpetrator's criminal act, upon which the aider and abettor's derivative criminal liability is based, was " 'reasonably foreseeable' " or the probable and natural consequence of a criminal act encouraged or facilitated by the aider and abettor." (People v. Francisco (1994) 22 Cal.App.4th 1180, 1190, 27 Cal.Rptr.2d 695.)

In People v. Anderson, supra, 233 Cal.App.3d at page 1658, 285 Cal.Rptr. 523, the defendant raised the same claim as appellants, that the instruction on felony murder and aiding and abetting in CALJIC No. 8.27 is improper because it does not limit aiding and abetting liability to those deaths that are foreseeable. The court held that where the charged killings took place during the course of an independent felony, a defendant "... who aided and abetted the robbery, could potentially be liable for murder committed in the course of that robbery, even though the killings were not natural, reasonable, or probable consequences of the robbery. [Citation.]" (Ibid., italics in original.) The court noted that felony murder is not limited to foreseeable deaths. (Ibid.) Therefore, the instruction was proper. (Id. at p. 1659, 285 Cal.Rptr. 523.)