In re Loza
Annotate this CaseIn 2004, Cesar Loza handed a gun to a fellow gang member, who shot and killed a rival. A jury convicted Loza of first degree premeditated murder after being instructed on two derivative liability theories: direct aider and abettor liability, and the natural and probable consequences theory. In 2014, the California Supreme Court held that the natural and probable consequences theory could no longer support a premeditated murder conviction. In this habeas corpus proceeding, the Court of Appeal could not conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that the jury relied on the legally valid direct aider and abettor liability theory; therefore, it vacated Loza’s first degree murder conviction.
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.