How have the courts treated the nonstatutory aggravating factor in determining that a defendant's remorse was not sincere at the penalty phase?

California, United States of America

The following excerpt is from People v. McKinzie, 12 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 8748, 144 Cal.Rptr.3d 427, 2012 Daily Journal D.A.R. 10693, 281 P.3d 412, 54 Cal.4th 1302 (Cal. 2012):

[54 Cal.4th 1360]Defendant also suggests that the prosecutor relied upon other nonstatutory aggravating factors such as defendant's attempt during the guilt phase of the trial to blame another for his crimes. The record shows that the prosecutor made this point to emphasize that defendant's claimed remorse at the penalty phase was not sincere and that defendant's version of events, in which he claimed he did not strangle the victim and the victim fell into the ditch where her body was discovered, should not be believed. Both points were properly made. (See People v. Holloway (2004) 33 Cal.4th 96, 144145, 14 Cal.Rptr.3d 212, 91 P.3d 164 [prosecutor could properly inquire about defendant's false testimony at the guilt phase to rebut the defendant's claim of remorse].)

"The most advanced legal research software ever built."

Try it today free of charge!

The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.

Other Questions

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 a defendant's failure to testify at the penalty phase an error not to instruct the jury to refrain from drawing any inference from the fact that defendant did not testify at penalty phase? (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)

How have the courts treated references to a defendant's background and character as an aggravating factor? (California, United States of America)

How have the courts treated a defendant's claim that counsel failed to object to the trial court's incorrect belief that he had expressed no remorse at his initial sentencing hearing? (California, United States of America)

What is the test for determining whether a jury should consider a defendant's mental state as a mitigating factor in determining the penalty? (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)

In a penalty case, in what circumstances will the court allow the jury to instruct the jury on a defendant's failure to testify in the penalty phase? (California, United States of America)

Does a defendant have grounds to argue that a trial court prejudicially errs in failing to instruct the jury sua sponte at the penalty phase to disregard the no-sympathy instruction at the guilt phase? (California, United States of America)

Does Defendant have a claim that the trial court abused its discretion to treat Defendant as a "defendant" in a medical malpractice case? (California, United States of America)

How have the courts treated the nonstatutory aggravating factor in determining that a defendant's remorse was not sincere at the penalty phase?

"The most advanced legal research software ever built."

Other Questions

Trusted by top litigators from across North America.

Company

Product

Resources