How have courts interpreted section 190.3(1) of the California Penal Code on a jury's discretion to sentence a defendant to death?

"In People v. Brown [, supra,] 40 Cal.3d 512, 538-545 [230 Cal.Rptr. 834, 726 P.2d 516] (revd. on other grounds California v. Brown [, supra, 479] U.S. [----, 107 S.Ct. 837] [93 L.Ed.2d 934] ), we concluded that the directive of section 190.3 that the trier of fact 'shall impose a sentence of death' if it 'concluded that the aggravating circumstances outweigh the mitigating circumstances,' did not impermissibly restrict the jury's constitutional sentencing discretion. We rejected the defendant's proffered mechanistic construction of the words 'outweigh' and 'shall' in favor of one which directed the jury to weigh the various factors and determine under the relevant evidence which penalty is appropriate in a particular case. We noted, however, that the statutory language--particularly the words 'shall impose'--left roomfor some confusion about the jury's role and therefore directed courts in the future to instruct on the scope of the jury's discretion. We further stated that each prior case 'must be examined on its own merits to determine whether, in context, the sentencer may have been misled to defendant's [45 Cal.3d 803] prejudice about the scope of its sentencing discretion under the 1978 law.' (Id., [40 Cal.3d] at p. 544 [230 Cal.Rptr. 834, 726 P.2d 516] fn. 17.)