People v. Delgado
Annotate this CaseDefendant was convicted of robbery and kidnapping for purposes of robbery on evidence from which a jury could have determined an accomplice, rather than Defendant, personally performed the act of asportation necessary to the offense of kidnapping. Defendant appealed, contending that the trial court erred in failing to instruct, sua sponte, on the law of accomplice liability. The court of appeal affirmed, holding that the trial court was obliged to instruct in principles of accomplice liability as to the kidnapping charge, but the error was harmless. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding (1) the trial court was required to instruct on aiding and abetting liability as a general legal principle raised by the evidence and necessary for the jury's understanding of the case; but (2) the error was harmless, as no reasonable probability existed of a more favorable outcome had accomplice liability instructions been given.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.