Opinion ID: 1181110
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Exclusion of Mental Evidence.

Text: (44) Defendant maintains that independent of its impact on the guilt and sanity phases, exclusion of certain of his mental-state evidence, discussed ante, requires reversal of his penalty verdict in that it removed from the jury's consideration factors in mitigation under factors (d), (h), and (k) of CALJIC No. 8.84.1. As indicated, however, exclusion of the cited evidence at the guilt and sanity phases was not error. Defendant did not seek to introduce the evidence at the penalty phase. Moreover, much of the cited evidence โ that defendant suffered a head injury in Vietnam, that he received a head injury when he was 12 years old, that he was upset by symbols of Vietnam, and that his behavior changed for the worse on his return from Vietnam โ was before the jury in any event, as was abundant other evidence relative to defendant's asserted mental illness.