Opinion ID: 2614001
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Reliability of penalty determination

Text: (32) Defendant contends the prosecutor's comments upon defendant's lack of remorse invited the jury to consider prejudicial evidence not relevant to the penalty determination and thus violated his right under the Eighth Amendment to a reliable determination of penalty. ( Johnson v. Mississippi (1988) 486 U.S. 578 [100 L.Ed.2d 575, 108 S.Ct. 1981] [sentencing determination may not be predicated upon totally irrelevant factors]; Zant v. Stephens (1983) 462 U.S. 862, 884-885, 887, fn. 24 [77 L.Ed.2d 235, 254-255, 256, 103 S.Ct. 2733].) As indicated in the preceding discussion, we repeatedly have concluded that lack of remorse is a relevant consideration, because the presence of remorse is regarded as a mitigating factor. Accordingly, the prosecutor's suggestion to the jury that it consider defendant's lack of remorse did not render the penalty determination unreliable.