People v. Duarte CA2/7

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 19, 2022B311993California773 words

Opinion

Opinion

DISCUSSION

Senate Bill 1437 substantially modified the law relating to accomplice liability for murder, eliminating the natural and probable consequences doctrine as a basis for finding a defendant guilty of murder (People v. Gentile (2020) 10 Cal.5th 830, 842-843 (Gentile)) and significantly narrowing the felony-murder exception to the malice requirement for murder. (§§ 188, subd. (a)(3), 189, subd. (e)(3); see Lewis, supra, 11 Cal.5th at p. 957.) It also authorized, through new section 1170.95, an individual convicted of felony murder or murder based on the natural and probable consequences doctrine to petition the sentencing court to vacate the conviction and be resentenced on any remaining counts if he or she could not have been convicted of murder because of Senate Bill 1437’s changes to the definition of the crime. (See Lewis, at p. 957; Gentile, at p. 843.) There was disagreement among the courts of appeal whether new section 188, subdivision (a)(3)’s prohibition against imputing malice to establish liability for murder other than in specified felony-murder cases also precluded finding a defendant guilty of attempted murder under the natural and probable consequences…

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.