Opinion ID: 2633881
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Admission of Evidence of Defendant's Juvenile Misconduct

Text: Defendant contends evidence of his sexual assaults upon Rebecca Y., Brian M., and Cori H., should not have been admitted because defendant was a juvenile at the time of the incidents, and thus his actions were the impetuous and ill-considered product of his youth and immaturity and the admission of this evidence violated his constitutional rights to due process and a reliable verdict. This claim was not raised at trial and therefore is forfeited. ( People v. Pinholster (1992) 1 Cal.4th 865, 959-960, 4 Cal.Rptr.2d 765, 824 P.2d 571.) In any event, defendant's characterization of this evidence was a proper subject for argument to the jury concerning the weight it should be accorded, but does not establish that the jury's consideration of his juvenile adjudications was constitutional error. Moreover, as defendant observes, we have rejected several similar statutory and constitutional challenges to the admission of juvenile adjudications as evidence in aggravation. (See People v. Lucky (1988) 45 Cal.3d 259, 295, 247 Cal.Rptr. 1, 753 P.2d 1052; People v. Burton (1989) 48 Cal.3d 843, 862, 258 Cal. Rptr. 184, 771 P.2d 1270; Raley, supra, 2 Cal.4th at pp. 909-910, 8 Cal.Rptr.2d 678, 830 P.2d 712; People v. Lewis (2001) 26 Cal.4th 334, 376-380, 110 Cal.Rptr.2d 272, 28 P.3d 34.)