Opinion ID: 2517324
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 14

Heading: The Absence of an Instruction on Victim Impact Evidence

Text: (20) Defendant claims the court should have given an instruction on the proper use of victim impact evidence, to prevent an unduly emotional response from the jury. [21] He proposed no such instruction below. Even if he had, we have rejected the argument that a trial court must instruct the jury not to be influenced by emotion resulting from victim impact evidence. [Citations.] ( People v. Carey, supra, 41 Cal.4th at p. 134.) Defendant objects to certain arguments made by the prosecutor. He does not claim prosecutorial misconduct. Nevertheless, he asserts the remarks were so inflammatory the court should have given a cautionary instruction. Defense counsel was certainly free to respond to the prosecutor's victim impact arguments, and to request an instruction addressing them if he believed one was needed. However, defendant cites no authority for the proposition that the court must respond to closing argument by giving sua sponte limiting instructions.