Opinion ID: 1182062
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Failure to Instruct the Jury Regarding Deliberations When an Alternate Juror Is Substituted

Text: With the consent of both sides, Juror Collins was discharged during the penalty phase trial, but before deliberations began, so she could take her vacation. Alternate Juror Lorenz was substituted in her place. Lorenz heard all the evidence at the guilt and penalty phases and participated in all penalty phase deliberations. Defendant argues the court's failure to give sua sponte instructions: (1) requiring the jury to begin anew all deliberations (including guilt phase deliberations), and (2) to consider lingering doubt in mitigation of the penalty, constituted prejudicial error. As defendant acknowledges, we have already rejected his argument that all past deliberations must be set aside when an alternate juror is substituted before the penalty phase begins; he offers no sound reason for reconsideration of our decisions on this point. ( People v. Hernandez (1988) 47 Cal.3d 315, 339 [253 Cal. Rptr. 199, 763 P.2d 1289]; People v. Brown (1988) 46 Cal.3d 432, 461 [250 Cal. Rptr. 604, 758 P.2d 1135].) We have also held that a sua sponte lingering doubt instruction is not required; we perceive no reason in the facts of this case to depart from our decisions in this regard. ( People v. Sully (1991) 53 Cal.3d 1195, 1245 [283 Cal. Rptr. 144, 812 P.2d 163]; People v. Cox (1991) 53 Cal.3d 618, 676 [280 Cal. Rptr. 692, 809 P.2d 351].)