Opinion ID: 2633881
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Failure to Clarify Instruction Under Section 190.3, Factor (d), Regarding Mental Disturbance

Text: Defendant contends the trial court erred by not instructing the jury it could consider in mitigation evidence of defendant's mental or emotional disturbance at the time of the crimes regardless of whether there was a reasonable explanation or excuse for such disturbance. He did not preserve an objection to the trial court's instruction on this mitigating factor and therefore has forfeited this claim. ( Hudson, supra, 38 Cal.4th at pp. 1011-1012, 44 Cal.Rptr.3d 632, 136 P.3d 168.) In any event, there is no likelihood that the instruction as given, which modified the standard instruction to indicate that the jury could consider mental or emotional disturbance even if it was not a defense to the substantive charges, would have confused the jury or prevented it from considering the evidence offered by the defense in mitigation.