People v. Bryant, Smith and Wheeler

In People v. Bryant, Smith and Wheeler (2014) 60 Cal.4th 335, the defendants argued a witness was an accomplice as a matter of law under the natural and probable consequences theory of aiding and abetting, based on his participation in the defendants' gang and drug conspiracy. Bryant did not discount that the natural and probable consequences theory might be applicable to determine whether a witness was an accomplice, but concluded the theory was not supported by the evidence because it could not be said as a matter of law "that one of the reasonably foreseeable results of the drug dealing conspiracy was this particular set of murders. " (Id. at p. 431.)