Opinion ID: 1801755
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: Failure to instruct concerning the presumption of a life sentence

Text: Defendant contends the absence of an instruction that there is a presumption that life imprisonment without the possibility of parole is the appropriate sentence violated his rights to due process of law, to equal protection of the laws, to a reliable determination of the penalty, and to be free of cruel and unusual punishment, under the Fifth, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution. [46] Defendant acknowledges that we previously have rejected this contention ( People v. Kennedy (2005) 36 Cal.4th 595, 641 [31 Cal.Rptr.3d 160, 115 P.3d 472]; People v. Arias (1996) 13 Cal.4th 92, 191 [51 Cal.Rptr.2d 770, 913 P.2d 980]), but asserts these decisions were wrongly decided. He provides no persuasive reason for us to reconsider these decisions.