What is the test for determining whether a person is guilty of a crime as a direct perpetrator or as an aider and abettor?
California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Alexander M. (In re Alexander M.), F075956 (Cal. App. 2018):
A person may be guilty of a crime as a direct perpetrator or as an aider and abettor. (People v. McCoy (2001) 25 Cal.4th 1111, 1117 (McCoy); Pen. Code, 31.) An aider and abettor acts with "knowledge of the criminal purpose of the perpetrator and with an
Page 12
intent or purpose either of committing, or of encouraging or facilitating commission of, the offense." (People v. Beeman (1984) 35 Cal.3d 547, 560 (Beeman).) The "aider and abettor doctrine" "obviates the necessity to decide who was the aider and abettor and who the direct perpetrator or to what extent each played which role." (McCoy, supra, at p. 1120.) "'Before a judgment of conviction can be set aside for insufficiency of the evidence to support the trier of fact's verdict, it must clearly appear that upon no hypothesis whatever is there sufficient evidence to support it.'" (People v. Kwok (1998) 63 Cal.App.4th 1236, 1245.)
"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.
