SERIES 700 HOMICIDE: SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES AND DEATH PENALTY
F 767 RESPONSE TO JUROR INQUIRY ABOUT COMMUTATION OF SENTENCE IN DEATH PENALTY CASE
TABLE OF CONTENTS
F 767 Response to Juror Inquiry About Commutation Of Sentence In Death Penalty Case
F 767 Inst 1 The Supreme Court’s Instructional Language Should Take Precedence Over The CALCRIM Committee’s Language
NOTES
F 767 Note 1 Commutation Issues And Instructions
Return to Series 700 Table of Contents.
F 767 Response to Juror Inquiry About Commutation Of Sentence In Death Penalty Case
See FORECITE F 766.3.
F 767 Inst 1 The Supreme Court’s Instructional Language Should Take Precedence Over The CALCRIM Committee’s Language
*Modify CC 767 as follows [added language is underlined; deleted language is stricken]:
It is your responsibility to decide which penalty is appropriate for the defendant in this case. You must base your decision only on the evidence you have heard in court and on the instructions that I have given you. Do not speculate or consider anything other than the evidence and my instructions. You must not be influenced by speculation or by any considerations other than those upon which I have instructed you.
Points and Authorities
This Court Has The Power And Duty To Grant This Instruction Request – [See CALCRIM Motion Bank # CCM-001.]
The CC Instruction Fails To Utilize The Express Language Recommended By The California Supreme Court – People v. Letner (2010) 50 C4th 99, 206 provided the following suggested language:
In the future, if in a particular case the parties and the trial court decide that an instruction on this issue would be appropriate, the court might instruct the jury as follows: “It is your responsibility to decide which penalty is appropriate in this case. You must base your decision upon the evidence you have heard in court, informed by the instructions I have given you. You must not be influenced by speculation or by any considerations other than those upon which I have instructed you.”
This language should take precedence over that of the CALCRIM Committee which is an ad hoc administrative agency and not a court of law.
WARNING! Federal constitutional claims may be lost without proper federalization – To preserve federal claims counsel should add the applicable constitutional provisions and authority to the above points and authorities and explain how those provisions will be violated under the circumstances of this case. In death penalty cases additional federal claims should be added including, but not limited to, those in FORECITE CG 13.
F 767 NOTES
F 767 Note 1 Commutation Issues And Instructions
See FORECITE F 766.3 et seq.
