Wilson (defendant) was hanging out and drinking with Pierce and at one point noticed his watch was missing. Wilson accused Pierce of stealing it, but Pierce denied the accusation. Wilson truly believed that Pierce had stolen the watch and he continually brought it up over the course of the evening with Pierce continually denying taking it. After one of the accusations, Pierce began telling Wilson that he was a burglar. The two began to hatch a plan to break into a nearby drugstore that night. The two later went to the drugstore and Wilson boosted Pierce up into a window so he could get inside and rob it. As soon as Pierce was inside, Wilson ran to a phone and called the police to tell him that Pierce was robbing the drugstore. As a result, Pierce was arrested. Wilson had only planned the break in so that he could get Pierce arrested as a payback for his alleged theft of Wilson’s watch. However, Wilson was charged and convicted of aiding and abetting the burglary of the drugstore. Wilson appealed on the grounds that the jury instruction was improper because it did not contain a requirement that Wilson had the felonious intent to commit the burglary.