Opinion ID: 2509294
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: Preexecution Delay

Text: Defendant contends the delay in carrying out his execution is violative of his constitutional rights, including federal and state proscriptions against cruel and unusual punishment. We have previously considered and rejected this argument because, as we explained in People v. Ochoa, supra, 19 Cal.4th at pages 477-478, 79 Cal.Rptr.2d 408, 966 P.2d 442, [a]s long as it is reasonable, the time required for our statutorily mandated review is not a violation of a criminal defendant's constitutional rights; it is essential to ensuring that those rights are and have been respected. ... [ķ] As we stated in [ People v. ] Hill [(1992) 3 Cal.4th 959, 13 Cal.Rptr.2d 475, 839 P.2d 984], defendant's claim is in reality a facial challenge to the 1978 death penalty law. We have repeatedly held that the 1978 death penalty law is facially constitutional as a general matter [citation], and we adhere to our holding in Hill with regard to defendant's claim.