X hits on this document





87 / 115

appeared on his behalf at the first trial.  Defendant’s views with respect to the presentation of mitigating evidence also remained unchanged; defendant was adamant, in counsel’s words, that ‘[h]e does not want any evidence presented on his behalf because in his heart that is his private life and to bring that evidence into court would violate his relationships with everybody he holds dear and respects in this world.  And to him, those relationships are more important than anything else, including his life.’  [¶] Thus, counsel was confronted with the unenviable and wrenching choice of obeying the law as defined by this court in Deere I, or honoring his client’s deeply held convictions.  To make the dilemma even more acute, the trial court ordered counsel to present whatever mitigating evidence was available in accordance with our decision, or be held in contempt.”  (Deere II, supra, at p. 714.)

We went on to explain in Deere II, in the following three quoted paragraphs, that:

“Furthermore, decisions subsequent to the instant penalty retrial have largely undermined the court’s holding in Deere I.  As explained in People v. Bloom (1989) 48 Cal.3d 1194, which held that a sentence of death was not constitutionally unreliable merely because a self-represented defendant chose not to present mitigating evidence at the penalty phase:  ‘To the extent that Deere, supra, 41 Cal.3d 353, suggests that failure to present mitigating evidence in and of itself is sufficient to make a death judgment unreliable, it is based on a mistaken understanding of the Eighth Amendment’s reliability requirement and its reasoning in that regard is hereby disapproved.’  (Id. at p. 1228, fn. 9, italics added.)  Rather, ‘the required reliability is attained when the prosecution has discharged its burden of proof at the guilt and penalty phases pursuant to the rules of evidence and within the guidelines of a constitutional death penalty statute, the death verdict has been returned under proper instructions and procedures, and the

Document info
Document views592
Page views592
Page last viewedTue Jan 24 19:32:10 UTC 2017