Opinion ID: 1247774
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Dual Use of Aggravating Facts.

Text: (22) Defendant maintains the court made an impermissible dual use of his prior violent criminal acts against Kim P., Ernest F. and Catherine A. when it cited those offenses under both factor (b), the presence or absence of violent criminal activity, and factor (c), whether or not the offenses were committed while the defendant was under the influence of extreme mental or emotional disturbance. In People v. Melton, supra, 44 Cal.3d 713 we held that although an individual criminal act cannot be counted twice in aggravation for the same purpose, there is no constitutional obstacle to separate consideration of properly distinct aspects of the penalty determination, even when those aspects happen to coexist in a single incident. ( Id. at pp. 764-765.) Here, after reciting the prior offenses as factor (b) criminal activity, the court discussed their circumstances at length in reaching its determination under factor (c). Based on its evaluation of the circumstances surrounding the two charged crimes and the defendant's criminal history, as reflected in the prior violent criminal acts, the court concluded defendant was not in the instant case acting under the influence of extreme mental or emotional disturbance; rather his purpose was sexual gratification. Use of the prior criminal acts for the foregoing distinct purposes was not error.