Opinion ID: 1311837
Heading Depth: 5
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Multiple Use of Underlying Crime.

Text: Defendant argues the instructions permitted the jury to consider the robbery and kidnapping of Benham as aggravating circumstances under both factors (a) and (b). It is settled that factors (b) and (c) of section 190.3 pertain only to criminal activity other than the crimes for which the defendant was convicted in the present proceeding. ( People v. Miranda, supra, 44 Cal.3d 57, 105-106.) Although in Miranda, supra, we expressed doubt that a jury would believe factors (b) and (c) embrace the guilt phase offenses, in order to avoid any possible confusion, we directed trial courts in the future to expressly instruct that factors (b) and (c) refer to crimes other than those underlying the guilt determination. (44 Cal.3d at p. 106, fn. 28.) In the case at bench, there could have been no confusion concerning consideration of the guilt phase robbery and kidnapping crimes as section 190.3 factor (b) criminal activity. The trial court specifically instructed the jury as to which of defendant's alleged criminal acts could constitute criminal activity and prior felony convictions ( ante, fn. 13, p. 37); the guilt phase crimes were not among them.