Does the natural and probable consequences doctrine apply to conspirators and aiders and abettors?

California, United States of America


The following excerpt is from People v. Delamora, C076142 (Cal. App. 2016):

The natural and probable consequences doctrine applies to conspirators and aiders and abettors. (People v. Prettyman (1996) 14 Cal.4th 248, 260-261.) It provides that

Page 32

"each member of a conspiracy is criminally responsible for the acts of fellow conspirators committed in furtherance of, and which follow as a natural and probable consequence of, the conspiracy, even though such acts were not intended by the conspirators as a part of their common unlawful design." (People v. Zielesch (2009) 179 Cal.App.4th 731, 739.) Whether an unplanned crime is a natural and probable consequence of a conspiracy to commit the intended crime does not depend on whether a conspirator " 'actually foresaw the additional crime, but whether, judged objectively, [the unplanned crime] was reasonably foreseeable.' [Citation.]" (Ibid.) An unplanned crime need not even have been a strong probability. (Ibid.) "Whether the unplanned act was a 'reasonably foreseeable consequence' of the conspiracy must be 'evaluated under all the factual circumstances of the individual case' and 'is a factual issue to be resolved by the jury' [citation], whose determination is conclusive if supported by substantial evidence [citations]." (Id. at pp. 739-740.)

Other Questions


Does the natural and probable consequences doctrine apply to conspirators and aiders and abettors? (California, United States of America)
Does the natural and probable consequences doctrine apply to an aider and abettor? (California, United States of America)
Does the natural and probable consequences doctrine apply to an aider and abettor in an attempted murder case? (California, United States of America)
Does the natural and probable consequences doctrine apply to those aider and abettor of a crime? (California, United States of America)
What is the legal test for failing to provide sufficient evidence to convict an aider and abettor under the doctrine of natural and probable consequences? (California, United States of America)
What is the test for an aider and abettor to be found guilty of a crime under the "natural and probable consequence" doctrine? (California, United States of America)
What is the nature and probable consequences of the natural and probable consequence of the crime? (California, United States of America)
What is the test for determining whether a defendant can be held liable as an aider and abettor under the 'natural and probable consequences' doctrine? (California, United States of America)
Can a jury rely on the natural and probable consequences doctrine to find a defendant guilty in 1 for first degree premeditated murder as an aider and abettor? (California, United States of America)
What is the test for a defendant convicted of first degree murder as an aider and abettor under the natural and probable consequences doctrine? (California, United States of America)
X



Alexi white


"The most advanced legal research software ever built."

Trusted by top litigators from across North America.