People v. Chiu
59 Cal. 4th 155
| Cal. | 2014Background
- Two forms of aider-and-abettor culpability exist: direct aiding/abetting the intended crime, and liability under the natural-and-probable-consequences doctrine for any subsequent offense.
- This case concerns the second form, applying NP consequences to first-degree murder under a theory that the target offense (assault or disturbing the peace) could yield murder.
- Defendant Bobby Chiu was convicted of first-degree murder under NP consequences, based on aiding Che in a target offense with murder as a foreseeable consequence.
- The trial court instructed the jury to consider whether the target offense and a coparticipant’s murder fit NP consequences; the jury returned a first-degree murder verdict.
- Court of Appeal reversed, holding instructional error; this Court held that a defendant cannot be convicted of first-degree murder under NP consequences and affirmed the reversal.
- Under the final ruling, liability for first-degree murder must rest on direct aiding and abetting principles; NP consequences may apply only to second-degree murder in this context.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| May an aider and abettor be convicted of first-degree premeditated murder under NP consequences? | People asserted NP consequences can yield first-degree murder. | Chiu contended NP consequences cannot reach first-degree murder. | No; NP consequences cannot support first-degree murder conviction. |
| Was the instructional error harmless given a two-theory instruction? | People argued the valid theory (direct aiding) supported the verdict. | Chiu argued the invalid NP-consequences theory tainted the verdict. | Error prejudicial; reversal affirmed; remedy to retry or reduce to second-degree if desired. |
| Should NP consequences apply to premeditated murder versus other degrees? | People urged NP consequences apply to murder generally for accomplices. | Chiu urged no first-degree liability under NP consequences. | NP consequences applies to second-degree murder; cannot elevate to first-degree liability. |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. McCoy, 25 Cal.4th 1111 (Cal. 2001) (limits aiding and abetting liability to the intended crime; rejects broader automatic first-degree liability under NP consequences)
- People v. Medina, 46 Cal.4th 913 (Cal. 2009) (defines natural and probable consequences; foreseeability is objective and jury-determined)
- People v. Prettyman, 14 Cal.4th 248 (Cal. 1996) (establishes NP consequences doctrine framework)
- People v. Favor, 54 Cal.4th 868 (Cal. 2012) (applies NP consequences with caution when premeditation is involved; distinguishes penalty provisions)
- People v. Lee, 31 Cal.4th 613 (Cal. 2003) (discusses penalties under NP consequences and state of mind considerations)
- People v. Guiton, 4 Cal.4th 1116 (Cal. 1993) (discusses harmless-error analysis with dual theories)
- People v. Chun, 45 Cal.4th 1172 (Cal. 2009) (limits review when verdict could be based on invalid theory)
- People v. Culuko, 78 Cal.App.4th 307 (Cal. App. 2000) (notes NP consequences is independent of felony-murder rule)
- People v. Knoller, 41 Cal.4th 139 (Cal. 2007) (discusses first-degree murder elements and accomplice liability)