Can a jury consider in aggravation any criminal activity committed by defendant?

Defendant argues the instructions just mentioned were wrong because they implied the jury could consider in aggravation any criminal activity committed by defendant, whereas the jury could consider only criminal activity involving force or violence or the threat to use force or violence. ( 190.3, factor (b).) But when the trial court defined the factors that the jury could consider in aggravation and mitigation,

[110 Cal.Rptr.2d 505]

it properly limited the criminal activity the jury could consider to those involving "the use or attempted use of force or violence or the express or implied threat to use force or violence." We find no reasonable likelihood that, given these instructions, the jury did not understand what types of criminal activity it could consider. (See People v. Clair (1992) 2 Cal.4th 629, 663, 7 Cal.Rptr.2d 564, 828 P.2d 705 [reasonable likelihood standard applies when reviewing claims of ambiguous instructions].)

[110 Cal.Rptr.2d 505]