Expert Defense Against Aider & Abettor, Accessory & Accomplice Charges in Bakersfield, Delano, Ridgecrest, Wasco & All Kern County
Charged with aiding and abetting a crime in Kern County? You’re facing the same criminal penalties as the person who actually committed the offense—even if you never touched a weapon, stole anything, or directly harmed anyone. California’s aiding and abetting law holds accomplices equally responsible for crimes committed by others, resulting in prison sentences, STRIKE convictions, and lifetime consequences for merely being present or providing minimal assistance.
Attorney Armando Josué Cespedes provides aggressive aiding and abetting defense throughout Kern County—Bakersfield, Delano, Ridgecrest, Wasco, Arvin, Shafter, Tehachapi, McFarland, California City, and every Kern County community. Perfect 5.0 Avvo rating with 34 five-star reviews and three consecutive Client’s Choice Awards (2023, 2024, 2025).
Many aiding and abetting cases involve innocent people wrongly charged for being in wrong place at wrong time, coerced participants, or individuals who lacked knowledge of the crime. We challenge prosecution’s theories of accomplice liability and prove you didn’t aid, encourage, or intend the crime.
Free Confidential Consultation: (888) 315-3326 | Available 24/7 | Hablamos Español
Understanding California’s Aiding and Abetting Law
Penal Code § 31 – Principals in Crime
The Law: All persons concerned in the commission of a crime, whether they directly commit the act or aid and abet in its commission, are principals and equally guilty.
What This Means:
Person who actually commits crime = principal (perpetrator)
Person who aids, abets, counsels, or encourages = also principal (accomplice)
Both face identical criminal charges and penalties
Elements of Aiding and Abetting: Prosecution must prove:
The perpetrator committed the crime
You knew the perpetrator intended to commit the crime
Before or during commission, you intended to aid and abet the perpetrator
Your words or conduct actually did aid, promote, encourage, or instigate commission of the crime
Critical Understanding:
You can be convicted of aiding and abetting even if you didn’t physically commit the crime
You can be convicted even if the actual perpetrator is never caught, charged, or convicted
Presence at crime scene alone is insufficient—must prove you aided/encouraged
What Is “Aiding”?
Providing Assistance:
Supplying tools, weapons, or means to commit crime
Providing transportation (driving getaway car)
Keeping watch (“lookout”)
Distracting victims or witnesses
Providing information necessary for crime
Creating diversion or opportunity
Examples:
Driving friend to robbery location knowing robbery planned
Providing gun to someone knowing they’ll use it in crime
Serving as lookout during burglary
Disabling security system to facilitate theft
What Is “Abetting”?
Encouraging or Instigating:
Encouraging perpetrator to commit crime
Cheering on or supporting during crime
Advising on how to commit crime
Being present to provide moral support
Facilitating crime through presence and encouragement
Examples:
Encouraging friend to fight someone
Yelling “get him!” during assault
Planning crime with others
Being present to help if needed
Natural and Probable Consequences Doctrine (Limited After 2019)
Previous Law: Accomplice liable for crimes that were natural and probable consequence of target crime.
Example Under Old Law:
You agree to help friend commit burglary
During burglary, friend unexpectedly kills someone
You could be convicted of murder as natural/probable consequence of burglary
Senate Bill 1437 (2018) – Felony Murder Rule Reform: According to [1]California Legislative Information[1], SB 1437 significantly narrowed accomplice liability for murder:
New Law (Effective January 1, 2019): Cannot be convicted of murder based solely on natural and probable consequences. Prosecution must prove:
You aided/abetted murder with intent to kill, OR
You aided/abetted target crime and acted with reckless indifference to human life as major participant
Impact:
Eliminates many aiding and abetting murder convictions
Still applies to non-homicide crimes
Retroactive—thousands of murder convictions being challenged
Senate Bill 775 (2021) – Further Reforms
Expanded SB 1437 to Attempted Murder and Manslaughter:
Same limitations on accomplice liability apply
Took effect January 1, 2022
Common Kern County Aiding and Abetting Scenarios
Robbery and Burglary
Typical Scenario:
Two or more people plan to rob store or burglarize home
One person commits actual robbery/burglary
Others drive getaway car, serve as lookout, or provide assistance
All charged with robbery/burglary as principals
Kern County Examples:
Bakersfield convenience store robberies (getaway driver charged)
Home burglaries in Bakersfield neighborhoods (lookout charged)
Commercial burglaries (person who drove to location charged)
Penalties:
Robbery: 2-9 years prison, STRIKE offense
Burglary (residential): 2-6 years prison, STRIKE offense
Defense Issues:
Did you know robbery/burglary was planned?
Did you intend to assist?
Were you merely present without aiding?
Assault and Battery
Typical Scenario:
Group fight or assault
One person commits actual assault/battery
Others present, yelling encouragement, or participating
All charged with assault/battery
Examples:
Bar fight (friends who encouraged or joined charged)
Gang assault (all members present charged)
Domestic violence (person who encouraged or assisted charged)
Penalties:
Simple assault/battery: Misdemeanor
Assault with deadly weapon: 2-4 years prison, STRIKE
Great bodily injury: 2-4 years, STRIKE
Defense Issues:
Were you trying to stop the fight?
Did you merely witness without encouraging?
Did you aid in any way?
Drug Sales and Transportation
Typical Scenario:
Drug trafficking operation
One person sells/transports drugs
Others assist (package drugs, transport, collect money, serve as lookout)
All charged with drug sales/transportation
Kern County Drug Trafficking: According to [2]California DOJ[2], Interstate 5 and Highway 99 are major drug corridors through Kern County. Aiding and abetting charges common in multi-person trafficking cases.
Penalties:
Possession for sale: 2-4 years prison
Sales/transportation: 3-5 years prison
Defense Issues:
Did you know drugs were present?
Did you knowingly assist in drug operation?
Were you merely passenger unaware of trafficking?
Gang Crimes
Typical Scenario:
Gang members commit crime together
Some participate directly, others provide support
All charged as principals with gang enhancement
Gang Enhancement (PC § 186.22):
Additional 2-10 years prison
Applies to accomplices equally
Kern County Gang Enforcement:[3]Bakersfield Police Department[3] gang units actively prosecute gang crimes with accomplice liability theories.
Defense Issues:
Challenge gang membership allegations
Prove lack of knowledge of crime
Show no intent to assist gang crime
Homicide Cases
Most Serious Aiding and Abetting:
Murder, manslaughter charges
Accomplices face life sentences
Post-SB 1437: Prosecution must prove accomplice:
Intended to kill, OR
Was major participant acting with reckless indifference to human life
Example:
Robbery gone wrong, someone killed
Under new law, getaway driver cannot automatically be convicted of murder
Prosecution must prove driver was major participant with reckless indifference
Penalties for Aiding and Abetting
Equal Punishment as Perpetrator
California Law: Aider and abettor faces same penalties as person who committed crime.
Examples:
If Principal Convicted of Robbery (2nd Degree):
Principal: 2, 3, or 5 years prison, STRIKE
Aider/Abettor: 2, 3, or 5 years prison, STRIKE
If Principal Convicted of Murder:
Principal: 25-to-life
Aider/Abettor (if met SB 1437 requirements): 25-to-life
If Principal Convicted of Drug Sales:
Principal: 3, 4, or 5 years prison
Aider/Abettor: 3, 4, or 5 years prison
Enhancements Apply Equally
Gang Enhancement (PC § 186.22):
If principal gets gang enhancement, aider/abettor gets it too
Additional 2-10 years prison
Firearm Enhancement (PC § 12022.53):
Traditionally applied to all accomplices
Recent reforms limit some firearm enhancements
“Vicarious liability” for gun use narrowed
Great Bodily Injury (PC § 12022.7):
Additional 3-6 years
Applies to accomplices if foreseeable
Three Strikes Law
STRIKE Offenses: If underlying crime is STRIKE (robbery, burglary, serious assault), aider/abettor gets STRIKE too.
Consequences:
50% custody requirement
Future convictions doubled or 25-to-life
Powerful Defenses to Aiding and Abetting Charges
1. Lack of Knowledge – You Didn’t Know Crime Was Planned
The Law: Must prove you knew perpetrator intended to commit the crime.
What We Prove:
You had no knowledge crime was going to occur
You were unaware of perpetrator’s intent
Crime happened suddenly without your foreknowledge
You were surprised when crime occurred
Examples:
Gave friend ride, didn’t know they planned to rob store
Present during fight that erupted unexpectedly
Sold item not knowing buyer would use it in crime
Accompanied friend on errand, unaware of criminal purpose
Evidence:
Your testimony about lack of knowledge
Timeline showing no opportunity to learn of plan
Lack of communications about crime
Your shocked reaction when crime occurred
Result: No knowledge = essential element not proven = not guilty of aiding and abetting
2. Lack of Intent to Aid – You Didn’t Intend to Assist
The Law: Must prove you intended to aid, promote, or encourage the crime.
What We Prove:
You had no intent to help commit crime
Your actions weren’t intended to assist
Any assistance was accidental or unintentional
You opposed the crime
Examples:
Present but trying to talk friend out of crime
Actions that coincidentally helped weren’t intended as aid
Tried to stop crime but failed
Merely present as bystander
Evidence:
Your statements discouraging crime
Attempts to prevent crime
Lack of communication showing intent to help
Witness testimony you opposed crime
Result: No intent to aid = not guilty of aiding and abetting
3. Mere Presence – Being Present Isn’t Aiding and Abetting
The Law: Mere presence at crime scene, even with knowledge crime occurring, is insufficient for aiding and abetting.
What We Prove:
You were merely present
You didn’t do anything to aid or encourage
Presence alone doesn’t equal guilt
No words or conduct promoting crime
Examples:
Passenger in car during robbery (didn’t help, just present)
Present during fight but didn’t participate or encourage
Knew friend planned crime but didn’t assist
Happened to be at location when crime occurred
Evidence:
Video showing you standing by without participating
Witness testimony you didn’t help
Lack of communications showing assistance
Your passive behavior
Result: Mere presence without aiding = not guilty
4. Withdrawal – You Withdrew Before Crime Occurred
The Law: If you initially planned to help but withdrew before crime committed, not guilty.
Requirements for Valid Withdrawal:
You notified others you were withdrawing
You did everything possible to prevent crime
Withdrawal communicated before crime occurred
Examples:
Told friend you wouldn’t participate in robbery
Left scene before crime happened
Tried to talk perpetrator out of crime
Called police to prevent crime (ultimate withdrawal)
Evidence:
Communications showing withdrawal
Your absence from scene when crime occurred
Efforts to stop crime
Witness testimony about withdrawal
Result: Valid withdrawal = not guilty of crime
5. Accessory After the Fact (PC § 32) – Not Aiding and Abetting
Important Distinction: Helping someone AFTER crime committed = accessory after the fact (PC § 32), NOT aiding and abetting.
PC § 32 Penalties:
Much less serious than aiding and abetting
Felony: 16 months, 2, or 3 years prison (maximum)
Often probation available
What We Prove:
You helped AFTER crime already completed
You weren’t involved in planning or commission
Help was limited to post-crime assistance
Examples:
Gave friend place to hide after robbery
Helped dispose of evidence after crime
Lied to police to protect friend after crime
Provided money to friend fleeing after crime
Result: Reduce aiding and abetting to accessory after fact = significantly reduced penalties
6. Duress or Coercion – Forced to Participate
The Law: If you aided under threat of immediate harm, not guilty.
Requirements:
You were threatened with death or serious bodily harm
Threat was immediate
Reasonable person would have believed threat
No reasonable opportunity to escape
Examples:
Gang member forced to participate in crime under threat
Threatened with violence if didn’t drive getaway car
Forced to serve as lookout under duress
Evidence:
Threats made to you
History of violence by perpetrator
Your fear and lack of alternatives
Immediate danger if refused
Result: Acted under duress = not guilty (or reduced charges)
7. Entrapment by Law Enforcement
The Law: If law enforcement induced you to aid crime you weren’t predisposed to commit, not guilty.
What We Prove:
Undercover officer or informant encouraged your participation
You had no predisposition to aid crime
Government created criminal conduct
Examples:
Informant pressured you to help drug deal
Undercover officer convinced you to participate
Government agents created entire criminal enterprise
Result: Entrapment = not guilty
8. Lack of Causation – Your Conduct Didn’t Aid
The Law: Your words or conduct must have actually aided crime.
What We Prove:
Crime would have occurred regardless of your actions
Your conduct didn’t actually help
No causal connection between your actions and crime
Examples:
Provided tool that wasn’t used in crime
Gave advice that wasn’t followed
Attempted to help but assistance was ineffective
Result: No causation = not guilty
9. Accomplice Testified Against You (Impeachment)
The Law: Accomplice testimony alone insufficient for conviction—must be corroborated.
What We Challenge:
Accomplice lying to get better deal
Accomplice has motive to blame you
Lack of corroboration for accomplice claims
Inconsistencies in accomplice testimony
Evidence:
Plea deals accomplice received for testimony
Inconsistent statements by accomplice
Lack of physical evidence supporting accomplice
Your contradictory evidence
Result: Uncorroborated accomplice testimony = reasonable doubt = not guilty
10. SB 1437 Defense (Murder Cases)
For Murder/Manslaughter Aiding and Abetting:
What We Prove:
You didn’t personally kill
You didn’t intend to kill
You weren’t major participant with reckless indifference to life
Murder wasn’t foreseeable to you
Post-SB 1437 Requirements: Prosecution must prove:
You aided with intent to kill, OR
Major participant + reckless indifference (very high bar)
Examples:
Getaway driver in robbery where unexpected killing occurred
Lookout in burglary where homeowner killed
Person who planned robbery but killing not foreseeable
Result: Cannot meet SB 1437 standard = reduce murder to lesser charge or acquittal
Special Issues in Aiding and Abetting Cases
Proving Intent and Knowledge
Prosecution’s Burden: Difficult to prove what you knew and intended.
Circumstantial Evidence:
Communications (texts, calls, social media)
Your statements to police
Witness testimony about conversations
Your behavior before/during crime
We Challenge:
Alternative interpretations of communications
Lack of direct evidence of knowledge
Reasonable doubt about intent
Multiple Defendants and Plea Deals
Common Prosecution Tactic:
Offer plea deals to some defendants for testimony against others
Create “race to courthouse” (first to cooperate gets best deal)
Pit co-defendants against each other
Defense Strategy:
Challenge credibility of cooperating witnesses
Expose deals made for testimony
Show bias and motivation to lie
Conflicting Defenses
When Multiple Defendants:
Each defendant may have conflicting defense
One may claim sole responsibility to exonerate others
Others may blame each other
We Navigate:
Potential conflicts of interest
Joint defense agreements when beneficial
Separate representation when necessary
Kern County Prosecution of Aiding and Abetting
Kern County District Attorney:[4]Kern County DA[4] aggressively prosecutes accomplice liability, particularly in:
Gang crimes (all participants charged)
Robbery cases (getaway drivers, lookouts)
Drug trafficking (all members of operation)
Serious violent crimes
Challenges for Defense:
Prosecutors use accomplice testimony (with deals)
Gang enhancements frequently alleged
Seek maximum sentences for all participants
Why Choose Tu Defensor Criminalista for Aiding and Abetting Defense
Knowledge of Accomplice Liability Law
Understanding of PC § 31 and aiding/abetting elements
Expertise in SB 1437 murder reforms
Knowledge of natural and probable consequences limitations
Kern County Experience
Regular appearances in[5]Kern County Superior Court[5]
Relationships with[4]Kern County District Attorney[4] prosecutors
Knowledge of local judges’ views on accomplice cases
Challenge Accomplice Testimony
Aggressive cross-examination of cooperating witnesses
Expose deals and motives to lie
Impeach inconsistent testimony
Prove Lack of Knowledge/Intent
Present compelling evidence you didn’t know of crime
Show lack of intent to aid
Demonstrate mere presence without participation
SB 1437 Expertise
Post-conviction relief for murder convictions
New trial motions based on reformed law
Expertise in major participant/reckless indifference analysis
Co-Defendant Coordination
Navigate conflicts between defendants
Joint defense strategies when beneficial
Protect your interests in multi-defendant cases
Proven Results
Perfect 5.0 Avvo rating
34 five-star client reviews
Three consecutive Client’s Choice Awards
Numerous aiding and abetting dismissals and acquittals
Bilingual Services
Complete representation in Spanish (Hablamos Español)
Frequently Asked Questions
Can I be convicted if I didn’t actually commit the crime?
Yes. Aiding and abetting holds you equally responsible if you helped or encouraged crime.
What if I was just present and didn’t do anything?
Mere presence isn’t enough. Prosecution must prove you actually aided or encouraged crime. Strong defense.
What if I didn’t know my friend was going to commit crime?
Complete defense. Must prove you knew crime was planned and intended to help.
Can I be convicted if the actual perpetrator was never caught?
Yes. Can be convicted of aiding and abetting even if principal never identified or charged.
What if I changed my mind before crime happened?
Withdrawal defense. If you withdrew and tried to prevent crime, not guilty.
What if I helped someone after crime was already committed?
Accessory after fact (PC § 32), NOT aiding and abetting. Much less serious charge.
What if another defendant is testifying against me?
We challenge accomplice testimony aggressively. Must be corroborated. Often motivated by plea deals.
Do I face same penalty as person who committed crime?
Yes. Aiders/abettors face identical penalties as principals.
What is SB 1437?
2018 law eliminating most felony-murder aiding and abetting convictions. Requires intent to kill or major participant with reckless indifference.
Can I be convicted of murder if I didn’t kill anyone?
Under SB 1437, only if you intended to kill OR were major participant with reckless indifference to life. Big change from old law.
Contact Tu Defensor Criminalista for Aiding and Abetting Defense
Aiding and abetting charges threaten identical penalties as person who committed crime. Mere presence shouldn’t equal guilt. Lack of knowledge is complete defense. Don’t accept responsibility for someone else’s crime.
Attorney Armando Josué Cespedes is rated 5.0 on Avvo, with 34 five-star reviews from clients praising his dedication, professionalism, and results. Many note how his trial skills and attention to detail led to reduced charges or outright dismissals.
I was arrested for a DUI just recently, since Spanish is my first language, it was important to find a great attorney who was bilingual. Getting your first DUI can...
Armando cespedes went above and beyond for my case. I was very close to getting my license revoked as I am under the age of 21 and received my second...
I was referred to Mr. Cespedes by a family friend who was very pleased with his legal services. Unfortunately, I got a DUI a few months ago and I was...
Armando gets results with your best interest in mind. I was wrongfully being accused of making primal threats. Even though I was innocent, I was aware that the accusations are...
Extremely professional I recently had a brief phone consultation with Mr. Cespedes regarding a longtime friend of mine. Although he was unable to assist him with his legal needs, I...
English
Español de México