Opinion ID: 1351343
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 11

Heading: Validity of the special circumstance of killing of a peace officer.

Text: Section 190.2, subdivision (a)(7), establishes as a special circumstance, making a defendant eligible for the death penalty, that the victim was a peace officer intentionally killed during the performance of his or her duties, and the defendant knew or reasonably should have known that the victim was a peace officer engaged in the performance of his or her duties. (40) Defendant contends that the reasonably should have known language is unconstitutionally vague. We expressly rejected this argument in both People v. Rodriguez, supra, 42 Cal.3d 730, 779-782, and People v. Brown (1988) 46 Cal.3d 432, 444-445 [250 Cal. Rptr. 604, 758 P.2d 1135]. Defendant offers no persuasive reason to overrule those decisions. Concerned about the possible unconstitutionality of the statutory language (the trial preceded Rodriguez and Brown ), the trial court modified that language and instructed the jury that the special circumstance applied only if the defendant knew and reasonably should have known the victim was a peace officer. Defendant argues that the court had no authority to do so, but he cannot base a claim of reversible error upon an instruction more favorable to him than the law requires.