Opinion ID: 1369044
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 7

Heading: The penalty verdict.

Text: The trial court's instruction on the Governor's commutation power  the Briggs Instruction  violated the California Constitution. ( People v. Myers (1987) 43 Cal.3d 250, 270-272 [233 Cal. Rptr. 264, 729 P.2d 698]; People v. Montiel (1985) 39 Cal.3d 910, 928 [218 Cal. Rptr. 572, 705 P.2d 1248]; People v. Ramos (1984) 37 Cal.3d 136, 153 [207 Cal. Rptr. 800, 689 P.2d 430].) Those decisions mandate that the imposition of a death sentence following a penalty trial in which the Briggs Instruction was given be reversed as a miscarriage of justice within the meaning of article VI, section 13 of that Constitution. The Attorney General, however, asks us to overrule those decisions. The majority properly reject that plea, for principles of stare decisis require us to adhere to prior precedents establishing that the giving of the Briggs Instruction is reversible error. [24] Of course, those same principles should also command our adherence to Carlos v. Superior Court, supra, 35 Cal.3d 131 and People v. Turner, supra, 37 Cal.3d 302. KAUFMAN, J., Concurring and Dissenting. I concur in the reversal of the judgment of death under compulsion of People v. Ramos (1984) 37 Cal.3d 136, 158-159 [207 Cal. Rptr. 800, 689 P.2d 430] and People v. Montiel (1985) 39 Cal.3d 910, 928 [218 Cal. Rptr. 572, 705 P.2d 1248]. I concur fully in the majority opinion insofar as it discusses and overrules Carlos v. Superior Court (1983) 35 Cal.3d 131 [197 Cal. Rptr. 79, 672 P.2d 862] and in all other respects except for its purported holding there was Aranda-Bruton error here. ( Bruton v. United States (1968) 391 U.S. 123 [20 L.Ed.2d 476, 88 S.Ct. 1620]; People v. Aranda (1965) 63 Cal.2d 518 [47 Cal. Rptr. 353, 407 P.2d 265].) In my view the entire discussion as to whether there was in fact Aranda-Bruton error is both legally incorrect and unnecessary to the decision, since the majority concludes that any such error was in any event harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. I therefore dissent from the majority's conclusion that Aranda-Bruton error actually occurred here. Appellant's petition for a rehearing was denied November 12, 1987.