Is a defendant guilty of aiding and abetting a burglary even if someone else committed some or all of the criminal acts?

who aids and abets a crime is guilty of that crime even if someone else committed some or all of the criminal acts. (Ibid.)" (People v. McCoy (2001) 25 Cal.4th 1111, 1116-1117.)

Here, there was sufficient evidence that defendant specifically intended to aid and abet the commission of a residential burglary, such that the jury was justified in arriving at that verdict. On this very point, when defense counsel moved to dismiss count 1 on the aiding and abetting theory after the prosecution rested, the trial court denied the motion, reasoning: "There washe was on their property coming back down from the area of the house. His story doesn't make sense. He's there at 10:30 at night to get through a gate that apparently was locked at some time. This is in the reading of the evidence and most in favor of the People's case at this point. And that at the time that he is coming back down there is a person with a flashlight inside the house, the burglar alarms have gone off, that other person escapes, there is no other car in the area from a different person. Even so, he would have had to be there at the exact same instant that somebody was breaking into the house. So there is plenty of evidence. There's other things, too. So I am going to deny that motion." Under our deferential standard and viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the respondent, there is more than enough in this case to support the jury's verdict of guilty as to the aiding and abetting burglary charge in count 1. (People v. Smith, supra, 37 Cal.4th at pp. 738-739.)

Page 11