75 Cal.App.5th 191
Cal. Ct. App.2022Background
- On May 30, 2016, Sanchez drove an acquaintance (the eventual shooter) back to a park after a prior verbal/physical confrontation; the acquaintance brought a concealed shotgun, fired at a victim (wounding him), chased and fired again, then fled with Sanchez driving the pickup.
- Sanchez was charged with attempted murder (count 1) and assault with a firearm (count 2); jury convicted on both counts and he was sentenced to eight years.
- At trial the prosecution argued two theories for attempted murder: (1) Sanchez directly aided and abetted the shooter (requiring intent to kill); and (2) attempted murder was a natural and probable consequence of the aided crime (assault with a firearm).
- The jury received CALCRIM instructions on both direct aiding and abetting and the natural-and-probable-consequences (NPC) doctrine and returned a general verdict that did not specify which theory it relied on.
- On appeal the court found evidence sufficient for attempted murder but concluded, in light of SB 1437 and later SB 775, the NPC doctrine cannot be used to impose accomplice liability for attempted murder; because the verdict could have rested on the now-invalid NPC theory, the attempted murder conviction was vacated and reversed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Sufficiency of evidence for attempted murder (aider/abettor theory) | Evidence showed coordination, knowledge of prior confrontation, shooter brought a gun, Sanchez drove and fled — supporting intent and facilitation | Sanchez argued evidence insufficient to prove he intended or knew of the shooter’s intent to kill | Held: Evidence was sufficient for direct aiding-and-abetting attempted murder under Nguyen/Chiu standards |
| 2. Validity of NPC doctrine for attempted murder (due process) | NPC doctrine permitted conviction for unintended offenses that are natural/probable consequences of the aided crime | Sanchez argued NPC might violate due process as applied | Held: Court previously held NPC does not violate due process (but that issue is technically moot after SB 775) |
| 3. Effect of SB 1437 / SB 775 on NPC liability for attempted murder | People argued existing law permitted NPC liability (or did not concede in some filings) | Sanchez argued SB 1437 and SB 775 eliminate NPC as a basis to impute attempted murder to an accomplice | Held: SB 775 clarifies that NPC cannot be used to impose accomplice liability for attempted murder; that theory is invalid |
| 4. Harmlessness of instructing NPC theory alongside valid theory | People argued verdict could have been based on valid aiding-and-abetting theory and thus harmless | Sanchez argued the general verdict could have rested on the invalid NPC theory, requiring reversal | Held: Error was not harmless beyond a reasonable doubt because record gives no reliable basis to conclude jury relied solely on valid theory; attempted murder conviction reversed |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Chiu, 59 Cal.4th 155 (explaining two forms of accomplice culpability: intended crime and natural-and-probable-consequences)
- People v. Nguyen, 61 Cal.4th 1015 (aider/abetter guilty of attempted murder must intend to kill; evidence of intent may be circumstantial)
- People v. Lindberg, 45 Cal.4th 1 (standard for reviewing sufficiency of the evidence)
- People v. Medina, 46 Cal.4th 913 (foreseeability inquiry for natural-and-probable-consequences is objective and fact-specific)
- People v. Penunuri, 5 Cal.5th 126 (assault with a firearm may be established by aiming a loaded gun to intimidate)
- People v. Miranda, 192 Cal.App.4th 398 (credibility and inferences where defendant’s statements conflict with other evidence)
- In re Martinez, 3 Cal.5th 1216 (jurors are not equipped to determine whether a submitted theory is contrary to law)
- People v. Aledamat, 8 Cal.5th 1 (general-verdict reversal required unless error is harmless beyond a reasonable doubt)