Opinion ID: 2586480
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Failure to Instruct Regarding Burden of Proof, Unanimity on Aggravating Factors, and Presumption of Life

Text: Defendant asserts various instructional errors that we have considered and repeatedly rejected in previous decisions. Because he offers no persuasive reasons why we should reconsider our precedents, we reject his challenges. (20) There is no constitutional requirement that the trial court instruct the jury that it must find all aggravating factors beyond a reasonable doubt or, at a minimum, by a preponderance of the evidence. ( People v. Gutierrez (2009) 45 Cal.4th 789, 830 [89 Cal.Rptr.3d 225, 200 P.3d 847]; People v. Smith (2007) 40 Cal.4th 483, 526 [54 Cal.Rptr.3d 245, 150 P.3d 1224].) The trial court's failure to instruct the jury on a burden of proof does not violate a defendant's constitutional rights under the Sixth, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendments. ( People v. Gutierrez, supra, 45 Cal.4th at pp. 830-831.) The trial court need not instruct the jury that it must unanimously find true any particular aggravating factor. ( Id. at p. 829.) The United States Supreme Court decisions in Blakely v. Washington (2004) 542 U.S. 296 [159 L.Ed.2d 403, 124 S.Ct. 2531], Ring v. Arizona (2002) 536 U.S. 584 [153 L.Ed.2d 556, 122 S.Ct. 2428], and Apprendi v. New Jersey (2000) 530 U.S. 466 [147 L.Ed.2d 435, 120 S.Ct. 2348] ( Apprendi ), neither affect nor justify reconsideration of the foregoing decisions. (21) The federal Constitution does not require that the jury be instructed on a presumption in favor of a sentence of life imprisonment without possibility of parole. ( People v. Gutierrez, supra, 45 Cal.4th at p. 833; People v. Arias (1996) 13 Cal.4th 92, 190 [51 Cal.Rptr.2d 770, 913 P.2d 980].)