People v. Williams CA3

I. BACKGROUND

In 2011, defendant and two codefendants approached the victim sitting in his car in a parking lot and shot him 21 times, killing him. (People v. Banks et al. (Oct. 17, 2018, C077034) [nonpub. opn.] (Banks).)2 The prosecution’s theory at trial was that the shooting was retaliation for a previous dispute, and the prosecutor asked the jury to find defendant and the two codefendants “guilty as direct perpetrators,” and a third codefendant “guilty as an aider and abettor.” (Ibid.) Defendants argued they had acted in self-defense. (Ibid.) The trial court instructed the jury on aiding and abetting intended crimes using CALCRIM No. 401. The court also instructed the jury on first and second degree murder with malice aforethought, using CALCRIM No. 520, and first degree murder, using CALCRIM No. 521. The jury was not instructed using CALCRIM Nos. 402 or 403, which describe aiding and abetting principles under the natural and probable consequences doctrine, or on any felony murder theory. “The jury found [defendant] not guilty of first degree murder, but guilty of second degree murder. The jury found true the allegations that [defendant] personally used and discharged a…