Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

People v. Delgado

California Supreme Court

Decided April 4, 2013No. S192704Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in part

*493KENNARD, J., Concurring and Dissenting.

At defendant’s jury trial for the crime of kidnapping for robbery (Pen. Code, § 209, subd. (b)(1)),1 the prosecution’s evidence showed that defendant personally robbed but did not personally kidnap the victim; rather, he aided and abetted the kidnapper. The trial court did not, however, instruct the jury on the law of aiding and abetting, but only on the liability of a direct perpetrator for the crime of kidnapping for robbery, of which defendant was later convicted.

Like the majority, I conclude that the trial court’s omission of aiding and abetting…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Chapman v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  2. Neder v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1999
  3. People v. WatsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1956
  4. People v. BeemanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1984
  5. People v. PrettymanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1996

5 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