Opinion ID: 6105748
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 7

Heading: Absence of instruction requiring the jury to unanimously agree on the theory of first degree murder

Text: Among the theories the prosecutor advanced in support of a verdict of guilt on the count charging first degree murder were premeditated and deliberate murder, and murder during the commission of kidnapping and arson. The jury was instructed accordingly. Defendant claims he was deprived of various constitutional rights by the court's failure to also instruct the jury that it must unanimously agree whether defendant was guilty of murder based on premeditation and deliberation, or on the felony-murder doctrine. As defendant acknowledges, this court has repeatedly rejected the precise arguments he raises here. ( People v. Moore (2011) 51 Cal.4th 386 , 413, 121 Cal.Rptr.3d 280 , 247 P.3d 515 ; People v. Taylor (2010) 48 Cal.4th 574 , 626, 108 Cal.Rptr.3d 87 , 229 P.3d 12 ; People v. Morgan (2007) 42 Cal.4th 593 , 616-617, 67 Cal.Rptr.3d 753 , 170 P.3d 129 .) He presents no persuasive grounds for reconsidering this court's prior pronouncements on the issue. 9. Cumulative effect of the asserted errors at the guilt phase Defendant argues that the judgment must be reversed because the cumulative effect of the trial court's asserted evidentiary and instructional errors at the guilt phase deprived him of his state and federal constitutional rights to due process and a fair trial. We have rejected all of defendant's claims of evidentiary and instructional error with the exception of five such claims. As to those claims, we found, or assumed, error that did not prejudice defendant. (See ante , 219 Cal.Rptr.3d at pp. 370, 373-374, 379-380, 391-395, 401-402, 396 P.3d at pp. 512, 515-516, 519-520, 530-533, 538-539.) Whether considered individually or cumulatively, these errors do not warrant reversal of the judgment.