How have courts interpreted the aider and abettor doctrine in a stabbing case?
California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Schmaus, 135 Cal.Rptr.2d 521 (Cal. App. 2003):
5. The court said in People v. McCoy, supra, 25 Cal.4th at page 1120 that "in a stabbing case, one person might restrain the victim while the other does the stabbing. In either case, both participants would be direct perpetrators as well as aiders and abettors of the other. The aider and abettor doctrine merely makes aiders and abettors liable for their accomplices' actions as well as their own. It obviates the necessity to decide who was the aider and abettor and who the direct perpetrator or to what extent each played which role."
5. The court said in People v. McCoy, supra, 25 Cal.4th at page 1120 that "in a stabbing case, one person might restrain the victim while the other does the stabbing. In either case, both participants would be direct perpetrators as well as aiders and abettors of the other. The aider and abettor doctrine merely makes aiders and abettors liable for their accomplices' actions as well as their own. It obviates the necessity to decide who was the aider and abettor and who the direct perpetrator or to what extent each played which role."
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.
