Accessory MPC 242.3

[CaN Opener]

So Im reading my criminal law book for school and im reading about being an Accessory so this got me thinking, consider the following situation.


Im on my bike going 65 on the freeway I see a cop on the other side w/ his radar. about a mile up the road i see a motorcycle hauling ass for argument lets say 120 mph I give the cop tap and he slows down.

now my text book gives 5 conditions of when a person would be guilty of being an accessory. one of them being: provides aid or other means of avoiding arrest and the one of the others being warns the other party.

Now my limited knowledge of the law tells me that because the other bike was committing a felony the police officer does not have to see the crime to arrest (ie a motorists calls it in and has a video tape) and since I helped him avoid arrest and warned him it warrants me to ask.


is the cop tap legal?




yes i know this is very unlikly and a slippery slope argument im just tiring to justify my time on barf instead of studying.

thnx Ben

[RolnCode3]

Originally posted by CaN Opener
So Im reading my criminal law book for school and im reading about being an Accessory so this got me thinking, consider the following situation.


Im on my bike going 65 on the freeway I see a cop on the other side w/ his radar. about a mile up the road i see a motorcycle hauling ass for argument lets say 120 mph I give the cop tap and he slows down.

now my text book gives 5 conditions of when a person would be guilty of being an accessory. one of them being: provides aid or other means of avoiding arrest and the one of the others being warns the other party.

Now my limited knowledge of the law tells me that because the other bike was committing a felony the police officer does not have to see the crime to arrest (ie a motorists calls it in and has a video tape) and since I helped him avoid arrest and warned him it warrants me to ask.


is the cop tap legal?




yes i know this is very unlikly and a slippery slope argument im just tiring to justify my time on barf instead of studying.

thnx Ben
First problem, speeding is not a felony. (see recent discussion)

I can't copy/paste from my copy of the Legal Sourcebook, or I'd just post what's written there.

In this instance, it sounds like PC 659 is more appropriate.

659. Whenever an act is declared a misdemeanor, and no punishment
for counseling or aiding in the commission of such act is expressly
prescribed by law, every person who counsels or aids another in the
commission of such act is guilty of a misdemeanor.

That being said, I think the prosecution would have a hard time convincing twelve citizens that a tap on the helmet constitutes "harbors, conceals, or aids a principal"..."with the intent that said principal may avoid or escape from arrest, trial, conviction, or punishment". (lifted from the PC 32 verbage).

[}Dragon{]

Besides... the tap on the head means "Use your head" or "heads up". :thumbup

[motorman4life]

I am not a lawyer. Maybe we need a Lawyer forum?

It is my understanding that in CA, there really is no such thing as an accessory. There is someone that may air and abet, but in CA, accessories are principles. If you are the get-away driver, you are as much a bank robber as the guy inside with the gun that you are waiting for.

This can be good and bad for criminals. It gets guys (and gals) wrapped up in much bigger crimes than they intended. But, it puts a big burden on the prosecution to prove they had conspired in the larger crime and/or were aware of the big crime they were participating in, even if their part was very small.

The second issue is that juries have a hard time convicting people of bit parts in a major crime. Essentially, (using the felony murder rule here) if some guy provides a stolen car or even a closed cellphone for use in a robbery and someone is killed in the robbery, they go down for murder. That is an oversimplification, but there a lot of people out there that are "down for anything" no matter how shady it is... but when all the chips fall, they discover they bit off a lot more than they bargained for! ;)

[drizz]

Originally posted by motorman4life
I am not a lawyer. Maybe we need a Lawyer forum?


If you think there's drama in the rest of BARF, can you imagine the drama there?! I don't know how many lawyers you know, but I know enough to NEVER... EVER... E V A R want a lawyers forum on BARF :laughing

They can go talk on Lexis-Nexis or Westlaw's forums :p

[JPM]

Hey, this thread still works.

http://www.bayarearidersforum.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=165689

Look at PC sections 30, 31, 32, and 33. It gives the definitions of a principal and accessory to crimes.