Opinion ID: 1236812
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Failure to reiterate applicable guilt phase instructions.

Text: (11) Defendant alleges a violation of various federal and state constitutional rights because at the penalty phase the trial court failed to reiterate certain general instructions given at the guilt phase concerning evaluation of the evidence. (CALJIC Nos. 1.02 [statements of counsel not evidence], 2.20 [credibility of witnesses], 2.22 [weighing conflicting testimony], 2.27 [evaluating testimony of single witness], 2.80 [expert witness testimony].) As in past cases, we question whether there was error. Having heard nothing to contradict the earlier instructions on evaluating witnesses' credibility, etc., we believe a reasonable jury would correctly assume those `generic' instructions continued to apply. [Citation.] ( People v. Brown (1988) 46 Cal.3d 432, 460 [250 Cal. Rptr. 604, 758 P.2d 1135]; People v. Wharton (1991) 53 Cal.3d 522, 600 [280 Cal. Rptr. 631, 809 P.2d 290].) We are unpersuaded that the lapse of time between the guilt and penalty phases impaired the jurors' memories or otherwise undermined the reliability of their deliberations. The jurors did not merely hear the instructions in a vacuum; presumably, they utilized them as directed in determining defendant's guilt and thereby developed a sufficient awareness of their relation to the deliberative process. In any event, even if error occurred, we cannot imagine this amounted to reversible prejudice in this case. ( People v. Brown, supra, 46 Cal.3d at p. 460.)