Criminal Law Class 12 11/14/16

Tonight Chapter 11 – Accomplice Liability Textbook: pp. 828-892 Outside Reading - Cases

Next week – 11/21/16 Chapter 12 – Theft Textbook pp. 893 – 935 You Tube/Videos of Theft (e.g., shoplifting/burglary/robbery) P. v. Sanchez (2016) 63 Cal. 4th 665 (establishing intent through expert)

Remaining Classes There are two classes left in the semester: 11/21/16 & 11/28/16 Final Exam is 12/5/16

Make Up Assignment As a make up for the missed class, each student must attend a criminal case in session for one half of a day – (morning or afternoon) It can be in any court but it must be a criminal case. Each student must submit a two page summary of the case. It must be typed, contain the name of the case, the court, the names of the judge and attorneys, the case number, and the issues that the student observed while in court. We will discuss the papers in class on 11/28/16.

Outside Reading Cases for tonight P. v. Clark (2016) 63 Cal. 4th 522 (Aiding and Abetting Murder) P. v. Trevino (2016) 1 Cal. App. 5th 120 (Burglary) – (next week) P. v. Martinez (1970) 3 Cal. App. 3d 886 (Battery) P. v. Libscomb (1993) 17 Cal. App. 4th 564 (Assault)

Assault Penal Code 240 An assault is an unlawful attempt, coupled with a present ability, to commit a violent injury on the person of another.

915. Simple Assault (Pen. Code, § 240) To prove that the defendant is guilty of this crime, the People must prove that: The defendant did an act that by its nature would directly and probably result in the application of force to a person; 2. The defendant did that act willfully; 3. When the defendant acted, (he/she) was aware of facts that would lead a reasonable person to realize that (his/her) act by its nature would directly and probably result in the application of force to someone; [AND] 4. When the defendant acted, (he/she) had the present ability to apply force to a person(;/.) [AND 5. The defendant did not act (in self-defense/ [or] in defense of someone else).]

Someone commits an act willfully when he or she does it willingly or on purpose. It is not required that he or she intend to break the law, hurt someone else, or gain any advantage. The terms application of force and apply force mean to touch in a harmful or offensive manner. The slightest touching can be enough if it is done in a rude or angry way. Making contact with another person, including through his or her clothing, is enough. The touching does not have to cause pain or injury of any kind. [The touching can be done indirectly by causing an object [or someone else] to touch the other person.] [The People are not required to prove that the defendant actually touched someone.] The People are not required to prove that the defendant actually intended to use force against someone when (he/she) acted…

916. Assault by Conditional Threat To prove that the defendant is guilty of this crime, the People must prove that: 1. The defendant willfully threatened to use force on another person unless that person immediately did an act that the defendant demanded; 2. The defendant intended to use force immediately to compel the other person to do the act; 3. The defendant had no right to demand that the other person do the act; 4. When the defendant made the threat, (he/she) had the present ability to use force on the other person; [AND] 5. The defendant placed (himself/herself) in a position to compel performance of the act (he/she) demanded and took all steps necessary to carry out (his/her) intention [AND 6. The defendant did not act (in self- defense/ [or] in defense of someone else).]

917. Insulting Words Are Not a Defense Words, no matter how offensive, and acts that are not threatening, are not enough to justify an assault or battery.

P. v. Libscomb

Battery Penal Code 242 A battery is any willful and unlawful use of force or violence upon the person of another.

960. Simple Battery (Pen. Code, § 242) To prove that the defendant is guilty of this crime, the People must prove that: 1. The defendant willfully [and unlawfully] touched in a harmful or offensive manner [AND 2. The defendant did not act (in self-defense/ [or] in defense of someone else/ [or] while reasonably disciplining a child).] [Words alone, no matter how offensive or exasperating, are not an excuse for this crime.]

Someone commits an act willfully when he or she does it willingly or on purpose. It is not required that he or she intend to break the law, hurt someone else, or gain any advantage. The slightest touching can be enough to commit a battery if it is done in a rude or angry way. Making contact with another person, including through his or her clothing, is enough. The touching does not have to cause pain or injury of any kind. [The touching can be done indirectly by causing an object [or someone else] to touch the other person.]

Assault and Battery are separate crimes. The California Penal Code defines Assault as an "unlawful attempt" to cause a "violent injury on the person of another" -- assault is often described as an attempt to commit a battery. A prosecutor must show that the defendant intended to commit a battery and had the "present ability" to do so, but does not need to show that physical contact actually happened. Battery describes force or violence used against another person. A prosecutor must show that the defendant willfully made contact with another person.

P.v. Martinez

Burglary Penal Code 459 P. v. Trevino

Accomplices, Accessories, Aiders and Abettors, and Principals – Oh My!

Common Law At common law, parties to a crime were divided into four types: 1. Principals in the 1st degree 2. Principals in the 2d degree 3. Accessories before the fact 4. Accessories after the fact.

A "principal in the first degree" was the person who actually carried out a crime. A "principal in the second degree" (an "aider and abettor") was a helper who was present at a crime scene but in a passive role, such as acting as a "lookout." An "accessory before the fact" was a helper who was not present at the crime scene. While some state laws retain the common law terminology, few states make any distinction between the criminal liability of crime perpetrators and their accomplices. All can be punished equally, whether they actually perpetrate a crime or only help bring it about.

There is a great deal of overlap (and confusion) among the terms, and are usually used interchangeably.  Aiding is assisting, supporting, or helping another to commit a crime. Abetting is encouraging, inciting, or inducing another to commit a crime. Aiding and abetting is a term often used to describe a single act. An accessory is someone who does any of the above things in support of a principle’s commission of crime. State laws typically distinguish between accessories “after the fact” and “before the fact.” These terms describe a person’s assistance to the crime before or after it is committed.

Aiding & Abetting / Accomplices Complicity is the act of helping or encouraging another individual to commit a crime. It is also commonly referred to as aiding and abetting. One who is complicit is said to be an accomplice. But, even though an accomplice does not actually commit the crime, his or her actions helped someone in the commission of the crime. The concept of accomplice liability means an accomplice faces the same degree of guilt and punishment as the individual who committed the crime.

Examples of Complicity The following examples illustrate the many ways an individual may be an accomplice to a criminal act: Serving as the getaway driver in a bank robbery. Turning off the alarm system of a jewelry store in which you work, knowing that it will be robbed later that evening. Loaning a handgun to someone who you know is planning to commit a crime. Directing a vehicle to a dead-end street where you know an armed carjacker is waiting.

California Penal Code 31 PC (California's aiding and abetting law) reads: "All persons concerned in the commission of a crime, whether it be felony or misdemeanor, and whether they directly commit the act constituting the offense, or aid and abet in its commission, . . . are principals in any crime so committed."

Accessories (after the fact) PC § 32 provides, “Every person who, after a felony has committed, harbors, conceals or aids a principal in such felony, with the intent that said principal may avoid escape from arrest, trial, conviction or punishment, having knowledge that said principal has committed such felony or has been charged with such felony or convicted thereof, is an accessory to such felony.”

400. Aiding and Abetting: General Principles A person may be guilty of a crime in two ways. One, he or she may have directly committed the crime. I will call that person the perpetrator. Two, he or she may have aided and abetted a perpetrator, who directly committed the crime. A person is guilty of a crime whether he or she committed it personally or aided and abetted the perpetrator. [Under some specific circumstances, if the evidence establishes aiding and abetting of one crime, a person may also be found guilty of other crimes that occurred during the commission of the first crime.

401. Aiding and Abetting: Intended Crimes To prove that the defendant is guilty of a crime based on aiding and abetting that crime, the People must prove that: 1. The perpetrator committed the crime; 2. The defendant knew that the perpetrator intended to commit the crime;

3. Before or during the commission of the crime, the defendant intended to aid and abet the perpetrator in committing the crime; AND 4. The defendant’s words or conduct did in fact aid and abet the perpetrator’s commission of the crime

Someone aids and abets a crime if he or she knows of the perpetrator’s unlawful purpose and he or she specifically intends to, and does in fact, aid, facilitate, promote, encourage, or instigate the perpetrator’s commission of that crime. If all of these requirements are proved, the defendant does not need to actually have been present when the crime was committed to be guilty as an aider and abettor. …

Withdrawal [A person who aids and abets a crime is not guilty of that crime if he or she withdraws before the crime is committed. To withdraw, a person must do two things: 1. He or she must notify everyone else he or she knows is involved in the commission of the crime that he or she is no longer participating. The notification must be made early enough to prevent the commission of the crime. AND 2. He or she must do everything reasonably within his or her power to prevent the crime from being committed. He or she does not have to actually prevent the crime. The People have the burden of proving beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant did not withdraw.

402. Natural and Probable Consequences Doctrine (Target and Non-Target Offenses Charged) …Under certain circumstances, a person who is guilty of one crime may also be guilty of other crimes that were committed at the same time. To prove that the defendant is guilty … , the People must prove that: 1. The defendant is guilty of (target crime) ; 2. During the commission of (target crime) a coparticipant .. committed the crime of (non target crime) ; AND 3. Under all of the circumstances, a reasonable person in the defendant’s position would have known that the commission of (non target crime) was a natural and probable consequence.

A coparticipant in a crime is the perpetrator or anyone who aided and abetted the perpetrator. It does not include a victim or innocent bystander. A natural and probable consequence is one that a reasonable person would know is likely to happen if nothing unusual intervenes. In deciding whether a consequence is natural and probable, consider all of the circumstances established by the evidence.

440. Accessories (Pen. Code, § 32) The defendant is charged [in Count ] with being an accessory to a felony. To prove that the defendant is guilty of this crime, the People must prove that: 1. Another person, … the perpetrator, committed a felony; 2. The defendant knew that the perpetrator had committed a felony or that the perpetrator had been charged with or convicted of a felony; 3. After the felony had been committed, the defendant either harbored, concealed, or aided the perpetrator; AND 4. When the defendant acted, (he/she) intended that the perpetrator avoid or escape arrest, trial, conviction, or punishment.

Some basics

Perpetrator versus Aider and Abettor : For purposes of culpability the law does not distinguish between perpetrators and aiders and abettors; Accessory After the Fact The prosecution must show that an aider and abettor intended to facilitate or encourage the target offense before or during its commission. If the defendant formed an intent to aid after the crime was completed, then he or she may be liable as an accessory after the fact. (People v. Cooper (1991) 53 Cal.3d 1158 [get-away driver, whose intent to aid was formed after asportation of property, was an accessory after the fact, not an aider and abettor.

Presence Not Required A person may aid and abet a crime without being physically present. (People v. Bohmer (1975) 46 Cal.App.3d 185. Nor does a person have to physically assist in the commission of the crime; a person may be guilty of aiding and abetting if he or she intends the crime to be committed and instigates or encourages the perpetrator to commit it. (People v. Booth (1996) 48 Cal.App.4th 1247,

Principal Acquitted or Convicted of Lesser Offense Although the jury must find that the principal committed the crime aided and abetted, the fact that a principal has been acquitted of a crime or convicted of a lesser offense in a separate proceeding does not bar conviction of an aider and abettor. (People v. Wilkins (1994) 26 Cal.App.4th 1089.

Specific Intent Crimes If a specific intent crime is aided and abetted, the aider and abettor must share the requisite specific intent with the perpetrator. “[A]n aider and abettor will ‘share’ the perpetrator’s specific intent when he or she knows the full extent of the perpetrator’s criminal purpose and gives aid or encouragement with the intent or purpose of facilitating the perpetrator’s commission of the crime.” (People v. Beeman (1984) 35 Cal.3d 547.

Knowledge and Assistance Even someone who learns of a crime after the fact and who in fact may disapprove of the crime, but who helps the person who committed it, may be charged with aiding, abetting, or as an accessory.

You can be convicted of a crime under aiding and abetting theory, PC 31, even if you played a fairly insignificant role in the crime. But there must be some type of involvement before you can be convicted. Mere knowledge about the crime or presence at the scene will not suffice. And unlike a conspiracy, there needn't be a prior agreement to commit the offense...you face liability simply for your voluntary involvement.

P. v. Clark

Textbook cases State v. Hoselton p. 831 Riley v. State p. 838 State v. Linscott p. 844 State v. V.T. – 849 Wilcox v. Jeffereyp. 851 State v. Helmenstein p. 853 P. v. Genoa p. 857 Bailey v,. Commonwealth p. 859 P. v. McCoy p.866 Megan R p. 869 State v. Formella p 870 Commonwaelth v., Koczwara p. 874 State v. Christy Pontiac p. 879