Legal Opinion

People v. Prettyman

California Supreme Court

Decided December 9, 1996No. S040008PublishedCited by 290 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

*254Opinion

KENNARD, J.

Under California law, a person who aids and abets a confederate in the commission of a criminal act is liable not only for that crime (the target crime), but also for any other offense (nontarget crime) committed by the confederate as a “natural and probable consequence” of the crime originally aided and abetted. To convict a defendant of a nontarget crime as an accomplice under the “natural and probable consequences” doctrine, the jury must find that, with knowledge of the perpetrator’s unlawful purpose, and with the intent of committing, encouraging, or facilitating the…

2Cases cited47 opinions

  1. Chapman v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  2. Estelle v. McGuireSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
  3. People v. WatsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1956
  4. United States v. GaudinSupreme Court of the United States · 1995
  5. Boyde v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1990

42 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by290 opinions

  1. People v. WaidlaCalifornia Supreme Court · 2000
  2. People v. JenkinsCalifornia Supreme Court · 2000
  3. People v. CoffmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 2004
  4. People v. AvilaCalifornia Supreme Court · 2006
  5. Juan H. v. Walter Allen IIICourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2005

285 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API