Does the instruction in section 190.3 of the California Criminal Code specify which of the factors aggravating and mitigating are aggravating?

California, United States of America


The following excerpt is from People v. Babbitt, 248 Cal.Rptr. 69, 45 Cal.3d 660, 755 P.2d 253 (Cal. 1988):

We decline to find the instruction fatally ambiguous. In People v. Jackson (1980) 28 Cal.3d 264, 316, 168 Cal.Rptr. 603, 618 P.2d 149, in rejecting the claim that a failure to specify which of the factors were aggravating and which mitigating made former section 190.3 invalid, we stated, "We believe that the aggravating or mitigating nature of these various factors should be self-evident to any reasonable person within the context of each case." We see no reason [755 P.2d 287] to conclude otherwise concerning the almost identical provisions of the 1978 law.

Other Questions


Does section 8.85 of the California Criminal Code, which instructed the jury to consider whether or not certain mitigating factors were present, unconstitutionally suggest that the absence of such factors amounted to aggravation? (California, United States of America)
Does section 8.85 of the California Criminal Code, which instructed the jury to consider whether or not certain mitigating factors were present, unconstitutionally suggest that the absence of such factors amounted to aggravation? (California, United States of America)
How have courts interpreted section 190.3(1) of the California Criminal Code when determining aggravation and mitigation factors in aggravation? (California, United States of America)
Does section 27 of the California Criminal Code, section 778a, subdivision (a)(1) of the Criminal Code of California apply to a defendant who is charged with a charge of conspiracy to commit a crime committed outside of the state? (California, United States of America)
Does section 190.3 of the California Criminal Code require a penalty phase jury to consider a defendant's unadjudicated criminal activity as a mitigating factor in the penalty phase? (California, United States of America)
Does Section 190.3 of the California Criminal Code require a trial court to instruct that certain sentencing factors (d), (e), (f) and (h) are relevant only as potential mitigators? (California, United States of America)
Is a defendant's claim that the court should have deleted reference to irrelevant mitigating factors from the instructions given to the jury regarding the aggravating and mitigating factors to be considered in determining the appropriate penalty? (California, United States of America)
Is the failure to give a "reasonable doubt" instruction sufficient to be considered as an aggravating factor under section 190.3, subdivision (b) of the California Criminal Code? (California, United States of America)
Does section 667 of the California Criminal Code prohibit the District Attorney from invoking section 654 of the Criminal Code to strike a prior conviction enhancement under Section 667? (California, United States of America)
Can a defendant be found to have committed a single physical act for purposes of section 654 of the California Criminal Code, Section 215 of the Code of Civil Procedure, Section 422 of the Criminal Code for carjacking? (California, United States of America)
X



Alexi white


"The most advanced legal research software ever built."

Trusted by top litigators from across North America.