Opinion ID: 2637243
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Refusal to Give Defendant's Requested Jury Instructions

Text: Defendant contends the court erred in refusing to give special instructions the defense requested at trial that would have told the jury that it need not be unanimous to consider mitigating evidence, that it had the power to choose the sentence of life solely to show mercy, and that a single mitigating factor could outweigh a number of aggravating factors. The court did not err. As we have repeatedly explained, the standard jury instructions the court gave in this case are adequate to inform the jurors of their sentencing responsibilities in compliance with federal and state constitutional standards. ( People v. Barnett (1998) 17 Cal.4th 1044, 1176-1177, 74 Cal. Rptr.2d 121, 954 P.2d 384, and cases cited; see also People v. Smith (2003) 30 Cal.4th 581, 638, 134 Cal.Rptr.2d 1, 68 P.3d 302; People v. Breaux (1991) 1 Cal.4th 281, 314-315, 3 Cal.Rptr.2d 81, 821 P.2d 585.) No additional instructions were required.