Does a defendant have liability to a police informant for the sale of methylamine under section 1118.1?

Defendant knew from the time of the preliminary hearing that the recipient of the methylamine was a police informant; applying the rationale of People v. Brown, supra, and defendant's own argument in support of his Penal Code section 1118.1 motion, defendant was aware of the problem raised by the informant's participation in the sale vis-a-vis defendant's liability for the substantive offense itself and was similarly aware of his potential liability for the attempt. Thus the trial court did not abuse its discretion in permitting the amendment.

Moreover, notwithstanding the action of the trial court in permitting the People to amend the complaint, it seems clear from applicable case authority that amendment of an accusatory pleading is not necessary in order to convict a defendant of a necessarily lesser included offense or an attempt to commit the substantive offense. As the court stated in People v. Wong (1973) 35 Cal.App.3d 812, 111 Cal.Rptr. 314: