Opinion ID: 1277687
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 13

Heading: Double Counting of Section 190.3, Factor (a)

Text: The jury was instructed to consider [t]he circumstances of the crime of which the defendant was convicted in the proceeding and the existence of any special circumstance found to be true. (See CALJIC No. 8.85.) As in People v. Cain (1995) 10 Cal.4th 1, 68, 40 Cal.Rptr.2d 481, 892 P.2d 1224, defendant contends the court was obliged, on its own motion, to instruct the jury not to `double count' the same facts as circumstances of the crime and as special circumstances. As we stated in Cain, We have repeatedly rejected claims of reversible error in this regard where the defense did not request an instruction against double counting, and there was no misleading argument by the prosecutor suggesting the same facts should be weighed twice, once under each rubric. ( Ibid ) In the present case, there was neither a defense request nor any misleading prosecutorial argument on the point.