Opinion ID: 1374541
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: Double Counting of Murders as Aggravating Factors Consisting of (A) Circumstances of Crime and (B) Criminal Activity Involving Violence

Text: (26) The trial court instructed the jury that in determining the penalty they should consider, take into account, and be guided by the factors listed in section 190.3, subdivisions (a) to (k), which the instructions then set forth. Those factors included (a) [t]he circumstances of the crime of which the defendant was convicted and (b) [t]he presence or absence of criminal activity by the defendant which involved the use or attempted use of force or violence or the express or implied threat to use force or violence. Appellant contends that the instructions, as given, erroneously permitted the jury to consider the murders as aggravating factors under both categories. However, the jury was also instructed that [i]n the penalty phase you may consider only the [evidence of three robberies committed by appellant and Klaess on December 20 and 21] as it bears upon the presence or absence of criminal activity by the defendant which involved the use or attempted use of force or violence or the express or implied threat to use force or violence. (Italics added.) By thus limiting the evidence to be considered under factor (b), the court precluded consideration of the circumstances of the murders under that factor. Thus the claim of error is without merit.