Francisco Orosco Garcia v. M. Evans

Good Law
670 F. App'x 622
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 10, 201615-16836California576 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Francisco Orosco Garcia (“Garcia”) appeals the district court’s denial of his petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 . We affirm.

First, the trial court’s use of modified jury instruction CALJIC No. 3.16 did not result in a directed jury verdict against Garcia. The jury was not instructed that Garcia was either a “principal” or an “aider and abettor” as a matter of law. Rather, the jury was instructed that if the crimes were committed, Garcia was an “accomplice” as a matter of law. An “accomplice” was defined as a person who was “subject to prosecution” for the offense if he had aided or abetted the crime or was part of a conspiracy to commit the crime. Accordingly, CALJIC No. 3.16 instructed the jury that Garcia was subject to prosecution, and not that Garcia was necessarily guilty of the offenses. Garcia also points to CALJIC No. 3.14, which provides that a person who assents to, aids, or assists in a crime without knowledge of its unlawful purpose cannot be prosecuted as an accomplice. However, CALJIC No. 3.14 does not define an accomplice to be any person who assents to, aids, or assists in a crime with knowledge of unlawful purpose.…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.