Opinion ID: 2612432
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 8

Heading: Extreme Mental or Emotional Distress as a Mitigating Factor

Text: (27) In accordance with section 190.3, factor (d) (CALJIC former No. 8.84.1) the jury was instructed to consider [w]hether or not the offense was committed while the defendant was under the influence of extreme mental or emotional disturbance. Defendant asserts that by referring to extreme conditions, the instruction precluded consideration of any lesser disturbance. The contention lacks merit. In People v. Ghent, supra, 43 Cal.3d 739, we held that in light of the catchall instruction that the jury may consider any other circumstance which extenuates the gravity of the crime (former § 190.3, factor (j), now § 190.3, factor (k)), the jury was aware that it could take into account a mental condition which, though perhaps not deemed `extreme,' nonetheless mitigates the seriousness of the offense. (43 Cal.3d at p. 776; accord People v. Hunter (1989) 49 Cal.3d 957, 987-988 [264 Cal. Rptr. 367, 782 P.2d 608]; People v. Adcox, supra, 47 Cal.3d at p. 270; People v. Babbitt (1988) 45 Cal.3d 660, 720 [248 Cal. Rptr. 69, 755 P.2d 253].) The instructions given to the jury went beyond this, however. At defendant's request the court instructed that, in addition to the statutory penalty factors, the jury could consider additional factors in mitigation, including the circumstances and effects of [defendant's] premature birth, the circumstances and effects of his being abused as a child by his father, his educational background and experiences, his religious background and experiences, and his physical condition. [12] In addition, both the prosecutor and defense counsel devoted considerable argument to defendant's claims of psychological impairment. Thus, in light of the court's instructions and the arguments of counsel, we conclude that the jury was properly permitted to consider any mitigating evidence relating to defendant's alleged mental or emotional disturbance. ( People v. Hunter, supra, 49 Cal.3d at pp. 987-988; People v. Babbitt, supra, 45 Cal.3d at pp. 720-721; People v. Lucky (1988) 45 Cal.3d 259, 296-297 [247 Cal Rptr. 1, 753 P.2d 1052].)