What is the test for setting aside a judgment of conviction of aiding and abetting first degree felony murder?

"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. Rehmeyer (1993) 19 Cal.App.4th 1758, 1765.)

"Whether the evidence presented at trial is direct or circumstantial, ... the relevant inquiry on appeal remains whether any reasonable trier of fact could have found the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. [Citations]" (People v. Towler (1982) 31 Cal.3d 105, 118-119.)

Page 36

"In order to support a finding of special circumstances murder, based on murder committed in the course of [a felony], against an aider and abettor who is not the actual killer, the prosecution must show that the aider and abettor had intent to kill or acted with reckless indifference to human life while acting as a major participant in the underlying felony. ( 190.2, subds. (c), (d).)" (People v. Proby (1998) 60 Cal.App.4th 922, 927.) At trial, the prosecution conceded defendant was not the actual killer and proceeded on a theory of aiding and abetting first degree felony murder. Thus, the jury was required to find defendant either harbored the intent to kill or he was a major participant in the crime and acted with a reckless indifference to human life.

The level of participation required to be a "major participant" was discussed by the Third Appellate District in People v. Proby, supra, 60 Cal.App.4th 922. The court explained the common meaning of the term "major" includes "'notable or conspicuous in effect or scope' and 'one of the larger or more important members or units of a kind or group.'" (Id. at p. 931.) Furthermore, the court explained the "term 'reckless indifference to human life' means 'subjective awareness of the grave risk to human life created by his or her participation in the underlying felony.'" (Id. at p. 928.)

In People v. Hodgson (2003) 111 Cal.App.4th 566, the court found a defendant's action of holding open a garage door, which facilitated his cohort's escape after the cohort robbed, shot and killed a woman in a parking garage, constituted major participation in the crime. In reaching that conclusion, the court relied in part upon the fact there were only two individuals involved in the crime. The crime was not

Page 37