What is the legal test for criminal liability under the "natural and probable consequences" doctrine in an aiding and abetted case?

An aider and abettor is criminally liable for "the natural and reasonable consequences of the acts he knowingly and intentionally aids and encourages. [Citation.]" (People v. Beeman (1984) 35 Cal.3d 547, 560.) Under the "natural and probable consequences" doctrine as applied to aiders and abettors, an aider and abettor need not have intended to encourage or facilitate the particular offense which the perpetrator ultimately committed. (People v. Prettyman, supra, 14 Cal.4th at p. 261.) "'His knowledge that an act which is criminal was intended, and his action taken with the intent that the act be encouraged or facilitated, are sufficient to impose liability on him for any reasonably foreseeable offense committed as a consequence by the perpetrator. It is the intent to encourage and bring about conduct that is criminal, not the specific intent that is an element of the target offense, which ... must be found by the jury.' [Citation.]" (Ibid.)

The "natural and probable consequences" doctrine is triggered in an aiding and abetting case when a codefendant commits an offense other than the target crime, and the offense is a natural and probable consequence of the target crime that the defendant aided and abetted. (People v. Prettyman, supra, 14 Cal.4th at p. 262.)

"A nontarget offense is a '"natural and probable consequence"' of the target offense if, judged objectively, the additional offense was reasonably foreseeable. [Citation.] The inquiry does not depend on whether the aider and abettor actually foresaw the nontarget offense. [Citation.] Rather, liability '"is measured by whether a reasonable person in the defendant's position would have or should have known that the charged offense was a reasonably foreseeable consequence of the act aided and abetted."' [Citation.] Reasonable foreseeability 'is a factual issue to be resolved by the jury.' [Citation.]" (People v. Chiu (2014) 59 Cal.4th 155, 161-162.) "Aider and abettor culpability under the natural and probable consequences doctrine is vicarious in nature. [Citations.]" (Id. at p. 164.) "'Because the nontarget offense is unintended, the mens rea of the aider and abettor with respect to that offense is irrelevant and culpability is

Page 11

imposed simply because a reasonable person could have foreseen the commission of the nontarget crime.' [Citation.]" (Ibid.)