What is the test for an aider and abettor of a murder?

the crime." [Citation.]' [Citation.] What this means here, when the charged offense and the intended offense--murder or attempted murder--are the same, i.e., when guilt does not depend on the natural and probable consequences doctrine, is that the aider and abettor must know and share the murderous intent of the actual perpetrator." (People v. McCoy, supra, 25 Cal.4th at p. 1118, fn. omitted.)

Thus, to be guilty of murder and attempted murder as an aider and abettor, "a person must give aid or encouragement with knowledge of the direct perpetrator's intent to kill and with the purpose of facilitating the direct perpetrator's accomplishment of the intended killing - which means that the person guilty... as an aider and abettor must intend to kill. [Citation.]" (People v. Lee, supra, 31 Cal.4th 613, 624.)

"[P]roof of an attempt by a direct perpetrator is sufficient for purposes of aiding and abetting liability. If a direct perpetrator is thwarted and guilty only of an attempt, an aider and abettor may still be guilty of aiding and abetting the attempt. [Citations.]" (People v. Perez (2005) 35 Cal.4th 1219, 1226, italics in original.)

Finally, in order to withdraw as an aider and abettor, a party must notify his accomplices and have "done everything in his power to prevent commission of the crime. [Citation.]" (People v. Belmontes (1988) 45 Cal.3d 744, 793; People v. Jackson (1996) 13 Cal.4th 1164, 1221.)

The jury in this case was instructed with CALCRIM No. 401, aiding and abetting and intended crimes:

Page 20

CALCRIM No. 401 correctly states law on aiding and abetting. (People v. Stallworth (2008) 164 Cal.App.4th 1079, 1103.)