Opinion ID: 2618245
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 64

Heading: Failure to Strike the Allegedly Improper Special-circumstance Findings

Text: Reilly argues the trial court erred by failing at the penalty phase to strike, sua sponte, the lying-in-wait special-circumstance findings due to instructional error and insufficiency of evidence supporting the finding. In addition, he claims the court should likewise have stricken the multiple-murder special-circumstance findings because the jury was not instructed to find the intent to kill. As discussed, ante at pages 191-193, we reject these claims with the sole exception that each defendant could be convicted of only one multiple-murder special circumstance. (67b) We find, however, that there is no reasonable possibility that the jury's consideration of this extra special circumstance affected the penalty verdict. ( Jennings, supra, 53 Cal.3d at pp. 390-391.)