Opinion ID: 2626390
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Reference to Penalty

Text: In his rebuttal argument, the prosecutor urged jurors not to accept defense counsel's view of the evidence or to return a second degree murder verdict. The prosecutor theorized that counsel wanted to avoid both a penalty phase and any special circumstance issue. Counsel objected and requested a bench conference. Anticipating counsel's concerns, the trial court struck the quoted language from the record. The court also told the jury not to consider any issue of penalty phase whatsoever. The prosecutor agreed, explaining to the jury that only guilt was then under review. Contrary to what defendant now claims, no prejudice occurred. The challenged reference was brief, fleeting, and mild. (See People v. Kipp (2001) 26 Cal.4th 1100, 1130, 113 Cal.Rptr.2d 27, 33 P.3d 450.) The trial court told jurors to ignore the remark as soon as it was made. They received another warning against considering penalty shortly before guilt deliberations began. We can only assume jurors properly performed their duty and followed their instructions in this regard.