Opinion ID: 1281505
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Double Counting of Special Circumstances

Text: (30) A second issue arises from the fact that the jury found true special circumstances of rape-murder and sodomy-murder as to each victim. Additionally those special circumstances were, under factor (a), considered as aggravating factors. Based on section 190.3, factor (a), the jury was instructed to consider: The circumstances of the crime with which the defendant was convicted in the present proceeding and the existence of any special circumstances found to be true. The prosecutor's remarks invited the jury to consider not only the facts of the case which included rape and sodomy, but also the fact that those offenses were special circumstances. The issue is whether this situation improperly permitted excessive counting of special circumstances, either by the number of felony-murder special circumstances alleged as to each victim or their consideration under factor (a). We recently discussed and resolved these issues in People v. Melton (1988) 44 Cal.3d 713 [244 Cal. Rptr. 867, 750 P.2d 741]. We rejected the position, which had been supported by the plurality opinion in Harris, supra, 36 Cal.3d 36, that there was any statutory or constitutional impediment to the jury considering as special circumstances the various felonies which were part of the indivisible course of conduct involving the murder. ( Melton, supra, 44 Cal.3d at pp. 763-768; and see Harris, supra, 36 Cal.3d at pp. 64-66.) [31] We also noted that while there might in theory be a problem with considering such felonies both as circumstances of the murder and as special circumstances, the possibility of real prejudice was remote. ( Melton, supra, 44 Cal.3d at pp. 768-769.) We conclude the potential for prejudice was not realized here. The jury was fully aware of the facts and, again, was not instructed to weigh aggravating factors in some mechanical way.