Opinion ID: 2600609
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 7

Heading: Refusal to Instruct on Accessory to a Felony

Text: Defendant contends the trial court erroneously refused to instruct on the offense of being an accessory after the fact to a felony. As we explain, we conclude the trial court did not err in refusing the instruction.
Defense counsel asked the trial court to instruct the jury with CALJIC No. 6.40, which defines the offense of being an accessory after the fact to a felony, within the meaning of section 32. [6] Defense counsel based his request on defendant's testimony that Hill had caused Kesha's injuries, and that, in order to protect Hill, defendant had lied to police officers and others about the cause of the burns. The prosecutor opposed this request because he had not charged defendant with such a crime. The trial court ultimately refused the requested instruction because the evidence did not show that defendant had the intent required to be an accessory at the time he made the statements, and because the evidence on which he was relying was exculpatory. The court noted, however, that defense counsel was free to argue to the jury that the evidence at most showed that defendant was guilty of being an accessory, an uncharged offense, and that defendant should therefore be acquitted. Defense counsel did not present this argument in summation.
Defendant contends the trial court's refusal to instruct on being an accessory after the fact denied him a constitutionally adequate opportunity to present a defense because an accessory instruction was part and parcel of the defense theory of the case. We have previously rejected a similar contention. ( People v. Schmeck (2005) 37 Cal.4th 240, 291-292 [33 Cal.Rptr.3d 397, 118 P.3d 451].) An accessory instruction was not essential to defendant's defense. Through defendant's testimony and defense counsel's closing argument, the jury was fully apprised of the defense theories that it was Hill rather than defendant who caused Kesha's fatal injuries and that defendant lied in order to protect Hill. (See ibid. )