PEOPLE v. SCOTT (ROYCE LYN)

Appellant’s Errata Letter Regarding Appellant’s Opening Brief

Cal.February 15, 2008

(C cyt | STATE OF CALIFORNIA ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER, Governor OFFICE OF THE STATE PUBLIC DEFENDER Susan Ten Kwan, Deputy State Public Defender 221 Main Street, 10" Floor San Francisco,California 94105 Qj Inpesce RT COPY Telephone: (415) 904-5600 Wli ivimiVila Xo Fax: (415) 904-5635 February 13, 2008 SUPFILED|RT Hon.Frederick K. Ohlrich FEB 16 2008 Clerk of the Supreme Court ; ATTN: MARY JAMESON Frederick K. Onitich Clerk 350 McAllister Street, First Floor San Francisco, CA 94102 ~Beputy f 5 Re: People v. Royce Lyn Scott, SO648A8 Dear Ms. Jameson: This letter is to inform the Court oftypographical errors contained in Appellant’s Opening Brief which wasfiled on July 23, 2007. Thefirst error relates to the misspelling of the last name of prosecution witness Kenneth Osburn. In instances where the word “Eastbourne”is set forth, the word “Osburn”should be substituted. There are 8 pages in the Opening Brief where the correction is needed: Page 11: lines 23, 24 and 25 Page 12: lines 1, 5 and 9 Page 16: lines 13, 14, 17, 19 and 20 Page 17: line 1 Page 98: lines 15, 19, 22, 23, 24 and 26 Page 228: line 13 Page 233: line 10 Page 297: lines 15 and 26 Hon. Frederick K. Ohlrich February 13, 2008 Page 2 The seconderrorrelates to page designations in the Table of Authorities. For the Court’s convenience, pages to be substituted in Appellant’s Opening Brief, including a corrected Table of Authorities, are attached to this letter of errata. Respectfully submitted, SUSAN TEN KWAN Deputy State Public Defender Attorney for Appellant ATTACHMENT A from appellant, and thus wasofthe belief that they could have come from him. (12 RT 2086-2087.) Although the PGM and ABOtyping on blood and saliva samples of appellant were of the same “type” that was found on the victim’s bed sheet, Cooksey could not say that the samples matched. (12 RT 2087-2089.) Criminalist Donald Jones conducted RFLP DNAanalysis ofthe stains from the bed sheet and the victim’s vaginal swabs. (13 RT 2203, 2207, 2209-2210.) The semen donorprofile for three stains appeared to be from a single person. (13 RT 2222, 2228.) It was Jones’s opinion that the profile of samples was the sameasthat of appellant. (13 RT 2224-2225, 2230-2231.) The frequency of sperm fraction that matched appellant’s was 1 in 130 million of Black men; 1 in 420 million of Caucasian men and 1 in 250 million in Hispanic men. (13 RT 2236.) Jones wasnot able to say that the fragment from the crime scene, or the numberofbase pairs of the fragment, were exactly the sameas those of appellant. (13 RT 2271, 2275.) A numberofuseable fingerprints were found at the scene, including some on Ms. Morris’s bedpost, the inside upper portion of the sliding door frame and drinking glasses in the kitchen. (11 RT 1944-1946.) None of these prints matched appellant. A print recovered from oneof the glasses matched Webbie, but the others werenot identified as belonging to him, Ms.Morris or other family members. (11 RT 1946-1948; 1952, 2054.) On November4, 1992, on a matter unrelated to the Morris homicide, appellant was arrested during a burglary at the home of Kenneth Osburn (“Osburn”) and Jeffrey Cole. (11 RT 2032.) This incident began in the early morning hours of November4, when Osburn andhis partner Jeffrey Cole (“Cole”) were watching television in their living room. Around 12:50 a.m., someoneentered the house through the unlocked 1] sliding doorleading to the dining room. (11 RT 1900-1901.) Osburn saw a Black man, whotold him and Cole to get on the floor and give him their wallets. (11 RT 1901-1902.) The man then said he needed a microwave and told them to stay on the ground while he wentto get their microwave. Osburn and Cole heard the man rummaging throughthe kitchen drawers, and then going out the sliding glass door. The man later came backinside and again directed them to stay on the floor. (11 RT 1903-1904.) Appellant wasarrested at the scene by the police; a wallet belonging to Osburn wasfoundin his possession. (10 RT 1860-1861.) Appellant spoketo the police after his arrest and admitted committing two additional burglaries, one that had occurred on August3, and the other on August 9, 1992. Appellant was asked about another burglary, one that had occurred on August 25" and in whichthe sliding glass door at the home was broken. Appellant admitted he had committed a burglary that matched the circumstancesofthe third burglary the police described, but stated that he had norecollection of breakinga sliding glass door to enter the house. (10 RT 1863-1867.) After talking to appellant, the police later obtained blood samples as well as a sexual assault kit from appellant. (11 RT 2039-2040, 2047.) Thefirst burglary that appellant told the police he had committed occurred on August 3, 1992, around 2:30 a.m. The resident of the house, Dorothy NancyPruss (“Pruss”), was watching television when she heard a rustling noise near the kitchen area. (10 RT 1816-1817.) Pruss had recently finishing hangingher laundry in her backyard, and thought she had locked the sliding door when she went back inside. (10 RT 1817, 1820.) Thinking the noise was her dog, Pruss checked around. Pruss heard another noise and then saw a Black manin her house, holding her purse and fanny pack. 12 packet for two prior convictions (Pen. Code, §§ 664/211 and Health and Sat. Code, § 11350), Exh. No. 68. (17 RT 2609.) Palm Springs Police Department technician Roger L. Snyder compared the fingerprints of appellant, Exh. Nos. 41 and 42,to the fingerprint card contained in appellant’s prior prison packet. It was his opinion that the fingerprints in Exh. Nos. 68, 41 and 42 were the same person. (17 RT 2611-2613.) The Court found true both prior conviction special allegations pursuantto Penal Code sections 667 and 667.5, subdivision (b). (17 RT 2614.) PENALTY PHASE Prosecution Case In addition to the circumstancesof the crime, the prosecution presented evidence of an assault and attempted robbery that occurred during the burglary at the Cole/Osburn home.'' When appellant entered the house on the night of November4, 1992, Osburn and his roommate Cole were having an argument. (18 RT 2654-2655.) Appellant appeared to be angry with Cole, and started yelling that what he (Cole) had doneto Osburn wasnot right. (18 RT 2655.) Appellant screamed and acted belligerent. (18 RT 2655-2657, 2659.) Appellant forced Cole to apologize to Osburn a numberoftimes (18 RT 2666), and after he ordered them both to lay on the floor, he kicked Osburn, then stomped on Cole’s back and hit him with a fire place poker. Appellant then went to the kitchen, took the microwave and placedit outside. He returned and again stomped on Osburn’s back and hit and kicked Cole. He demanded money and '' The November 4, 1992,incident regarding Kenneth Osburn and Jeffrey Cole was presented by the prosecution as aggravating evidence of other criminal activity involving violenceor threat of violence committed by appellant pursuant to Penal Code section 190.3, factor (b). 16 threatened Cole. (18 RT 2657-2658.) Osburn placed his wallet on the coffee table. Appellant had the poker in his hands whenthe police arrived and arrested him. (18 RT 2659.) At the timeofhisarrest, it was determined that appellant had cocaine in his system. (19 RT 2764-2765.) The prosecution introduced an incident from March, 1988, involving Thomas Meyer (“Meyer’’) and Dan King (“King’’), both of whom worked and lived at a construction site in Palm Springs.'? One night, while asleep in their camper, Meyerheard the screen door open and then was confronted by appellant who demandedtheir money. (18 RT 2629-2630.) Meyer threw his jacket to appellant, who remained outside After discovering nothing wasin it, appellant became angry, banged on the doorsill and threatened to shoot Meyer and King with a shotgun if they did not give him money. (18 RT 2631-2632.) King took out a gun which he kept underhis pillow andfired four shots at appellant, who wasstill in the doorway. (18 RT 2633.) Appellant was hit and the police were summoned. Appellant did not have a shotgun. In fact, the only items found whenthe police arrived werea tee shirt and a piece of wood. (18 RT 2633-2636, 2638; 2652-2653.) The prosecution also introduced victim impact evidence. Ms. Morris’s nephew, Raymond Harris Abelin,testified that his aunt was a dancer and had taught dance in Los Angeles before moving to Palm '2 The March 26, 1988, incident regarding Thomas Meyer and Dan King (18 RT 2652-2653) was presented by the prosecution as aggravating evidence of other criminal activity involving violence orthe threat of violence committed by appellant pursuant to Penal Codesection 190.3, factor (b). This incident wasalso presented as an additional aggravating factor, a prior felony conviction, pursuant to Penal Codesection 190.3, factor (c). 17 after receiving a report of a burglary. He took a statement from Daley and checkedthe house for possible points of entry and for items that had been disturbed. (10 RT 1837-1845.) It was subsequently determined that the latent prints obtained from the television matched appellant’s fingerprints. (11 RT 1923-1925.) Just after midnight on August 25, 1992, Emily Pollard was watching television in her living room when sheheard a loud crash from the kitchen area. As she went towardsthe kitchen, Pollard saw a Black man, who said something to her. Pollard did not hear him because she was yelling for her friend who was sleeping in a bedroom. Pollard ran out the front door of her house. When she returned the next morning, she discoveredthat the sliding glass door adjacent to the kitchen had been shattered with a rock. Her purse and a Polaroid camera which had beenon the kitchen counter were missing. (10 RT 1848-1853.) On November4, 1992, around 12:50 a.m., Kenneth Osburn was watching television and talking with his roommate Jeffrey Cole when a man came throughthe glass sliding door in their dining room. The door, which did not have a screen, was unlocked;it led to the outside pool area. The man told Osburn and Cole to get on down on the floor. After asking for their money, the man took Osburn’s wallet, which he put on a coffee table. Telling the mento stay on the floor, the man wentinto the kitchen; Osburn heard him going through the kitchen drawers. After the man said he was going to take their microwave, Osburn heard him go outside. Eventually, the man camebackinside, telling Osburn and Cole to stay on the floor. (11 RT 1899-1906.) At that point, Palm Springs Police Officer Donald Wayarrived at Osburn and Cole’s housein responseto a call about an intruder. Whenhearrived, he saw the man,later identified 98 dangerousnessto society.” Apart from arguing that appellant deservedthe death penalty because ofhis “violent nature” and “violent past” (20 RT 2817-2818), the prosecutor argued that appellant had a proclivity for entering residencesin the middle of the night and committing burglaries. In referring to appellant’s 1988 prior act of violence and felony conviction for the attempted robbery incident involving Thomas Meyerand Dan King, the prosecutor argued: Here we have, as we have with so many people whoare minding their own business, in this case, in their sleeping quarters, a camperat the construction site where they are working, and we have,again, a screen door, another factor that seems to be present when Mr. Scott strikes.... [{] We have the defendant whois angry, demanding,threatening, and simulating a weapon .... We have a clear episode four years before the murder showingthe violent nature of Mr. Scott. (20 RT 2816-2817.) In referring to the incident involving Jeffrey Cole and Kenneth Osburn, which occurred after the Morris homicide, the prosecutor argued that appellant’s conduct demonstrated a continued pattern of inflicting violence on unsuspecting victims in their own homes: You heard how Mr. Scott camein and, again, how heis demanding;he is angry; he is threatened. [Sic] Again, you have people minding their own businessin their own house, and again we havethis screen door element, Mr. Scott coming in where he does not belong; Mr. Scott bringing his violence on people that are minding their own business. ... [{[] You get a clear indication of the anger and violence presentin this incident, present in the defendant. (20 RT 2817-2818.) The message from the prosecutor’s argumentis that appellant was a clear and present danger that needed to be stopped or he 228 subsequentto the crime for which appellant was being sentenced, coupled with the prosecutor’s closing argument focusing on future dangerousness, the jurors should have beeninstructed that a sentence oflife without the possibility of parole meant that appellant would neverbeeligible for parole or that to base a sentencing decision on speculation about possible future release would be a violation of the jurors’ oaths. The prosecution suggested to the jury that appellant would be dangerous, urging it to sentence appellant to die because he had committed multiple violent acts against others, and that it was “lucky”for victims Cole and Osburn that the police arrived at the scene to preclude further violence and moreserious harm. (20 RT 2818.) The implicit message from the prosecutor’s argumentwasthat appellant was a dangerto all people. The prosecutor’s argument increased the harminherent in failing to instruct the jury on the definition of life without the possibility parole. Without the requested instruction, there was a substantial chance that the jury would sentence appellant becauseit believed that he was a dangerous person who might get out of prison and harm someone. It is fundamental that a “risk that the death penalty will be imposed in spite of factors which maycall for a less severe penalty . . . is unacceptable and incompatible with the commandsofthe Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments.” (Lockett v. Ohio (1978) 438 U.S. 586, 605.) Hadthe jury been accurately instructed concerning appellant’s parole ineligibility, there is a reasonable probability that at least one juror would have decided that death was not the appropriate penalty. (Wiggins v. Smith (2003) 539 U.S. 510, 536-538; Chapman v. California, supra, 386 U.S.at 24.) It cannot be established that the error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt and therefore had “no effect” on the penalty verdict. 233 any worse than they would have ordinarily been,it is not likely that the jury would have found this factor applicable beyond a reasonable doubt. (People v. Fernandez, supra, 226 Cal.App.3d at p. 680, citing People v. Young (1883) 146 Cal.App.3d 729, 734 [aggravating factor must make offense distinctively worse than it would have been].) Similarly, it is not likely that the jury would have found applicable or given much aggravating effect to the factor that there was a taking or attempted taking or damage involving great monetary value. Finally, a jury may not have foundthat appellant was on probation or parole when the homicide was committed, or that appellant’s prior performance on probation or parole was unsatisfactory. Even though there were arguably two aggravating circumstances found true beyond a reasonable doubtor by appellant’s admission- the use ofa weapon enhancement (§ 12022, subd. (b)) during the November 1992 second degree robbery involving Jeffrey Cole and Kenneth Osburn (Count 11) and the prior prison term enhancement (§ 667.5) — neither circumstance could properly be used to aggravate the terms or impose a ~ consecutive sentence. Appellant received a one year term for the prior prison term enhancementpursuantto section 667.5, and to rely on the same factor to impose an upper or consecutive term would constitute an improper dual use of facts. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 4.41, subd.(c); Peoplev. Coleman, supra, 48 Cal.3d at p. 163; People v. Fernandez, supra, 226 Cal.App.3d at p. 681.) Similarly, appellant received a one year term for the weapon use enhancement pursuant to section 12022, subdivision (b), and this factor could not be used to aggravate the counts relating to the Cole/Osburn incident due to the same prohibition of dual use offacts. (Ibid.) Nor could the use of a weapon circumstancebe used to aggravate 297 ATTACHMENT B TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Page(s) FEDERAL CASES Abul-Kabir v. Quarterman (2007)U.S.____—o[127 S.Ct. 1654] 2.eeeee eee 200, 211 Adamsv. Texas (1980) 448 U.S. 38 20.cecete eens passim Almendarez-Torres v. United States (1998) 523 U.S. 224 0...cnetteens 286 Apprendi v. New Jersey (2000) 530 U.S. 466 .............cece een eee eee e eens passim Atkins v. Virginia (2002) 536 U.S. 304...eccee nee eens passim Ballew v. Georgia (1978) 435 U.S. 223 2...ccctee eee eee eens 305 Batson v. Kentucky (1986) 476 U.S. 79 oocccene eee eee ees passim Bean v. Calderon (9th Cir. 1998) 163 F.3d 1073 21... cece ee ee eens passim Beck v. Alabama (1980) 447 U.S. 625 2c ccc ce cece e renee eens passim Blakely v. Washington (2004) 542 U.S. 296 0...cccee teen eens passim Blystone v. Pennsylvania (1990) 494 U.S. 299...ccceee teen nes 255, 309, 311 Booth v. Maryland (1987) 482 U.S. 496 0...ccteen ne tent nnees 187 xiii TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Page(s) Boydev. California (1990) 494 U.S.370, 377 2...eeeteens passim Bradley v. Duncan (9th Cir. 2002) 315 F.3d 1091 2...eeeeee passim Brewer v. Quarterman (2007) —-U.S.____—*[127 S.Ct. 1706]...eee passim Bronshtein v. Horn (3rd Cir. 2005) 404 F.3d 700 2.0...ceceeee eee 227 Bruton v. United States (1968) 391 U.S. 123 2...ccceee een eens passim Buchanan v. Angelone (1998) 522 U.S. 269 2...ceeeee tenes 221, 242 Cage v. Louisiana . (1990) 498 U.S. 39.....cece ence eee nee teen eens 124, 130, 136 Caldwell v. Mississippi (1985) 472 U.S. 320.......eee eee tenn een een eee passim California v. Brown (1988) 479 U.S. 538 2...eeeeee een eens . passim California v. Trombetta — (1984) 467 U.S.479 0...cece eee eens passim Callins v. Collins (1993) SIO U.S. 1141 0.ceeteens 211 Carella v. California (1989) 491 U.S. 263 2...ceeeens 124, 126, 135 XIV TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Page(s) Carter v. Kentucky (1981) 450 U.S. 288 2...cee eee eee eee eee passim Chambersv. Mississippi (1973) 410 U.S. 284 0...ccceee eee eens passim Chapmanv. California . (1967) 386 U.S. 18. 0... ceceee eee eee eens passim Clemonsv. Mississippi (1990) 494 U.S. 738 2...ceteee ete n ees 317 Coker v. Georgia (1977) 433 U.S. 584.0... eeeeee ee ences 142, 151, 154 Cooperv. Fitzharris (9th Cir. 1978) 586 F.2d 1325 1.0...cecetees 320 Coulter v. Gilmore (7th Cir. 1998) 155 F.2d 912 ... 0.ceeeee eee 48 Cunningham v. California — (2007) U.S. «127 S.Ct. 856] «2.eeeee passim Darden v. Wainwright (1986) 477 U.S. 168 1.ccceee e nes 232 Davis v. Georgia (1976) 429 U.S. 122 2...ceceteens 168, 182 DeJonge v. Oregon (1937) 299 U.S. 353 0.ceceeee n eee nn enes 123 Delo v. Lashley (1993) 507 U.S. 272 2.ccc ccc nee teen eee nnes 314 XV TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Page(s) Dix v. Kemp (11th Cir. 1985) 763 F.2d 1207 1.0... cccene eens 271 Donnelly v. DeChristoforo . (1974) 416 U.S. 6370.ceecece 320, 321 Drew v. United States (D.C. Cir. 1964) 331 F.2d 85 20...ceceees 81 Duncan v. Louisiana (1968) 391 U.S. 145 2...ceeeens 165, 247 Eddings v. Oklahoma (1982) 455 U.S. 104...cee eee eee 203, 204, 213, 318 Edmonsonv. Leesville Concrete Co. (1991) SOO U.S. 614...ccceen een n nee 27 Enmundv.Florida (1982) 458 U.S. 782 0...ccccece nee eens passim Estelle v. McGuire (1991) 502 US. 62 2.ceeeee eens passim Estelle v. Williams (1976) 425 US. 501 2.ceeee eee passim Featherstone v. Estelle (9th Cir. 1991) 948 F.2d 1497 1...eeeeee 53, 59, 81 Fernandez v. Roe (9th Cir. 2002) 286 F.3d 1073 2.0... cece cee ee eens 32, 36 Fetterly v. Paskett (9th Cir. 1991) 997 F.2d 1295 2...ceceeee ee passim XVI TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Page(s) Francis v. Franklin (1985) 471 U.SA. 307 2... cceeeeens 128, 134 Furmanv. Georgia (1972) 408 U.S. 238 2... ceeeee eee 210, 236, 299 Gall v. Parker (6th Cir. 2001) 231 F.3d 265 we eee eee eee 166, 171, 179, 182 Garceau v. Woodford (9th Cir. 2001) 275 F.3d 769 2... Leeee eee eee 101-102 Gardnerv. Florida . (1977) 430 U.S. 349occeee teen eens 60, 194 Godfrey v. Georgia (1980) 446 U.S. 420 0...cnnene ene 256, 262 Graham v.Collins (1993) 506 U.S. 461 2...ceetenes 145, 243, 274 Gray v. Mississippi (1987) 481 U.S. 648 2.cceen ee ene neae passim Green v. United States (1957) 355 U.S. 184 0.ceeeee eee en ene eens 122 Greerv. Miller . (1987) 483 U.S. 756 2...cneteee e eee 320 Gregg v. Georgia (1976) 428 U.S. 153 2...ceenena passim Gregory v. United States (D.C. Cir. 1966) 369 F.2d 185 2...ccceens 79 XVvii TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Page(s) Gniffin v. Illinois (1956) 351 U.S.12 2...ccctee ent n eee eee 318 Grigsby v. Mabry (8th Cir. 1985) 758 F.2d 226 21...eeeens 165 Hamling v. United States (1974) 418 U.S. 87 2.ceceteen ene nee nnn 122 Harmelin v. Michigan (1991) 501 U.S. 957 21ecten teen eens 306 Harris v. Alabama (1995) 513 U.S. 504...cccee cent e nen eneas 243 Harris v. United States (2002) 536 U.S. 545occeee nee teen eee 287 Harris v. Wood (9th Cir. 1995) 64 F.3d 1432 2.0...eeee eee 321 Heineyv. Florida (1984) 469 U.S.920 ............26.-.eect eee eee 204 Hernandez v. New York (1991) 500 U.S. 352 cceeeens 28 Hicks v. Oklahoma (1980) 447 U.S. 343.0... eee eee eben teen erence .... passim Hitchcock v. Dugger (1987) 481 U.S. 393 ..........eee c eee n ence eee eens 200, 211, 322 Holloway v. Horn (3rd Cir. 2004) 355 F.3d 707 2...eectees 49 XVill TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Page(s) Hopkinsv. Reeves (1998) 524 U.S. 88 20cccteen eas 144, 145 In re Winship (1970) 397 U.S. 358 00eeeeen een ees passim Irwin v. Dowd (1961) 366 U.S. 71726ceeeen eens 165 J.E.B. v. Alabamaex rel T.B. (1994) 511 U.S.1272.cecetee eee ees 26, 29 Jackson v. Virginia (1979) 443 U.S. 307 2.cccteen enn ene 127, 132 Johnsonv.California (2005) 545 U.S. 162 2...ceeee eens passim Johnson v. Mississippi (1988) 486 U.S. 578 0.ccene eee tenn eens 307 Kelly v. South Carolina (2002) 534 US. 246 2... cc cece eens 226, 227, 230-231 Kesser v. Cambra (9th Cir. 2006) 465 F.3d 351 2.0...ccceee ne ees 40 Killian v. Poole (9th Cir.2002) 282 F.3d1204 1.0...eccen ee 321 Kubatv. Thieret . (7th Cir. 1989) 867 F.2d 351 1...ccee teenies 207 Le v. Mullin (10th Cir. 2002) 311 F.3d 1002 ..........cece e eee n teens 187 xix TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Page(s) Lear v. Cowan (7th Cir. 2000) 220 F.3d 825 2...eecteee 145 Lewisv. Jeffers (1990) 497 U.S. 764 20.teeee teenies 193 Lockett v. Ohio (1978) 438 U.S. 5862.eeeeens passim Lockhart v. McCree (1986) 476 ULS. 162 20.ecteenee 167, 176 Loving v. Hart (C.A.A.F. 1998) 47 M.J. 438 20eeeee 145, 146 Lowenfield v. Phelps . (1988) 484 U.S. 231,244...ceeeee 236, 267 Lucero v. Kerby (10th Cir. 1998) 133 F.3d 1299 2...Leeeee 76 Martini v. Hendricks (3rd Cir. 2003) 348 F.3d 360 .. 0... eeceeeens 172 Mayfield v. Woodford (9th Cir. 2001) 270 F.3d 915 0...eeeee ee eee 232 Maynardv. Cartwright (1988) 486 U.S. 356.0...cceeeeee e eee 301, 308 McClain v. Prunty (9th Cir. 2000) 217 F.3d 1209.00... eee eee eee 23, 27, 45, 47 McCleskey v. Kemp (1987) 481 U.S. 2790.ceceences 255 XX TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Page(s) McGauthav. Califonria (1971) 402 U.S. 183 20.eccneeeeee ene eee 266, 269 McKinneyv. Rees (1993) 993 F.2d 1378 2...eeeeeeee eee passim McKoyv.North Carolina (1990) 494 U.S. 433 20.eccece nen ees 255, 256, 306 Miller-El v. Cockrell (2003) 537 U.S. 322 2.0... eeeteebeeen eee eee 29 Miller-El v. Dretke (2005) 545 U.S. 231 2.eeeeee een eee passim Mills v. Maryland (1988) 486 U.S. 36720eee312, 313, 315 Mongev.California (1998) 524 U.S. 721 0.ceecnet ennas 306, 315 Moore v. Balkcom (11th Cir. 1983) 716 F.2d 1511 2...ceeees 213 Moorev.Estelle (Sth Cir. 1982) 670 F.2d 56 2...ecns 180 Morganv.Illinois (1992) 504 U.S. 719 2.ccence een e eens 165 Mullaney v. Wilbur (1975) 421 U.A. 684 2.ccc cece ener e een ens 129 Myers v. Ylst (9th Cir. 1990) 897 F.2d 417occene 205, 306 XX1 TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Page(s) Nealv. Puckett (Sth Cir. 2001) 239 F.3d 683 2.0...eeeeee 232 Old Chief v. United States (1997) 519 U.S. 172 ceceene eens 106 Park v. California (9th Cir. 2000) 202 F.3d 1146 «1...eeeeee ee 59 Paulino v. Castro (9th Cir. 2004) 371 F.3d 1083 2.0.0...ceeeee 23,27 Payne v. Tennessee (1991) 501 U.S. 8082.eeeee eee passim Penry v. Johnson (2001) 532 U.S. 782 2.cteeeeee eens 200 Penry v. Lynaugh (1989) 492 U.S. 302 2.eeeeeeens passim Pruett v. Norris (8th Cir. 1998) 153 F.3d 579 2... eeceeeens 145 Pulley v. Harris (1984) 465 U.S.37 2...centeee neaes 237 Reeves v. Hopkinns (8th Cir. 1996) 102 F.3d977 2...ceeeens 145 Richardson v. United States (1999) 526 U.S. 813 2...ceceteen eens 305 Ring v. Arizona (2002) 536 U.S. 584.0...cecees 148, 302, 305, 307 XX TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Page(s) Roberts v. Louisiana (1976) 428 U.S. 325 2...eeeeee nee 210 Roper v. Simmons (2005) 543 U.S. 551 0...ceeee 142, 146, 147, 319 Rudy-Glanzer v. Glanzer (9th Cir. 2000) 232 F.3d 1258 ...... eee ee ce eee eee 105 Sandoval v. Calderon (9th Cir. 2000) 241 F.3d 765 2.0... .eeeeee eee 53 Sandstrom v. Montana (1979) 442 U.S.510 0... ccc ce cette ee neee 110, 128 Satterwhite v. Texas (1988) 486 U.S. 249 0.cecenee eee eens 266 Shafer v. South Carolina (2001) 532 U.S. 36 2... ccc ccc enn cece en eenee 226, 227, 231 Shepard v. United States (2005) 544 U.S.13 . 0... ccc eee ene e ene nen eenes 287 Simmonsv. South Carolina (1994) 512 U.S. 154...cccete ene e ne nees passim Skipper v. South Carolina (1986) 476 U.S. 1...eens216, 227, 253, 322 Solem v. Helm (1983) 463 U.S. 277 2...cnet teen te eeaee 318 South Carolina v. Gathers . (1989) 490 US. 805 2.ccccee een e teen nee 187 XXIil TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Page(s) Spazianov. Florida (1984) 468 U.S. 4470.eeenee 241, 267 Spencer v. Texas (1967) 385 U.S. 554...eccceeteen ene e teenies 109 Stringer v. Black (1992) 503 U.S. 222 0.ccccect tenets 317 Sullivan v. Louisiana (1993) 508 U.S. 275 2...cccett eee n eens passim Szuchon v. Lehman (3rd Cir. 2001) 273 F.3d 299 1... eeeeee eee 175, 182 Taylor v. Kentucky (1978) 436 U.S. 478 20.teen eee e tenes 220 Taylor v. Louisiana (1975) 419 U.S. 522 . occette eet eee e eee 27 Tennard v. Dretke (2004) 542 US. 274 0.2cee216, 221, 253, 254 Tison v. Arizona (1987) 481 U.S. 137 2... ccc ccc eee eee eens 143, 154 Trop v. Dulles (1958) 356 US. 86 2...cceet eee eens 150, 319 Tuilaepa v. California (1994) 512 U.S. 967 0...ccceee 193, 239, 242, 301 Turner v. Marshall (9th Cir. 1995) 63 F3d 807 2... cece cc cette een ene 33 XXIV TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Page(s) Turner v. Marshall (9th Cir. 1997) 121 F.3d 1248 ....... Dee ee ee teen e eee eeeeeeeees 49 Turner v. Murray (1986) 476 U.S. 28 06.ccceee teen enees 165 United States v. Battle (8th Cir. 1987) 836 F.2d 1084 .......... Leet tenet teens 48 United States v. Chalan (10th Cir. 1987) 812 F.2d 1302 2.0...cee33, 49 United States v. Chanthadara (10th Cir. 2000) 230 F.3d 1237 0... 02. eee eee . 174, 178, 182 United States v. Cheely (9th Cir. 1994) 36 F.3d 1439 2...ceceeens 145 United States v. Chinchilla (9" Cir. 1989) 874 F.2d 695 1.0... ccc cece eee eee ee as 48 United States v. Daniels (D.C. Cir. 1985) 770 F.2d 1111 0...cece ee ee ences 75 United States v. Esparza-Gonzalez (9th Cir. 2006) 422 F.3d 897 20... ccc cee eee eens 28 United States v. Foutz (4th Cir. 1976) 540 F.2d 733 2... cececee eens 60 United States v. Gordon (11th Cir. 1987) 817 F.2d 1538 0...ceeteens 49 United States v. Hall (Sth Cir, 1976) 525 F.2d 1254 2...cette ees 134 XXV TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Page(s) United States v. Halper (2nd Cir. 1978) 590 F.2d 422 2...eee59 United States v. Iron Moccasin (1989) 878 F.2d 226 0...ccceet e ene nes 49 United States v. Johnson (9th Cir. 1987) 820 F.2d 1065 ......ceees 86 United States v. Lane (1985) 474 U.S. 438 00.eeeee eens 53, 58, 59 United States v. LeMay (9th Cir. 2001) 260 F.3d 1018 2.1...eeeene 102, 105 United States v. Lewis (9th Cir. 1986) 787 F.2d 1318 2.0...eceens passim United States v. Lotsch (2nd Cir. 1939) 102 F.2d 35.0.0... . ceeeect eens 60 United States v. Mitchell (9th Cir. 1999) 172 F.3d 1104 ...... Lace eee eee e eee e nee eeees .... 132 United States v. Myers (Sth Cir. 1977) 550 F.2d 1036 «0.0... eeeee eens 63 United States v. Necoechea (9th Cir. 1993) 986 F.2d 1273 0...eecece eee nee 320 United States v. Pierce (11th Cir. 1984) 733 F.2d 1474 2.0...ceceee eens 59 United States v. Ragghianti (9th Cir. 1975) 527 F.2d 586 2... eeece teens 60 XXV1 TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Page(s) United States v. Smith (2nd Cir. 1940) 112 F.2d 83.0...eeeee teens 60 United States v. Tootick (9th Cir. 1991) 952 F.2d 1078 1.0...ccceee eee 86 United States v. Tucker (1972) 404 U.S. 443 0.cceeee ee nees 269 United States v. Vasquez-Lopez (9th Cir. 1994) 22 F.3d 900 2.0... ccc cece eens 29 United States v. Wallace (9th Cir. 1988) 848 F.2d 1464 ... 0.0... cee ee cee eee 320, 321 Valerio v. Crawford (9th Cir 2002) 306 F.3d 742 2.0... ccc ccc cee eee aes 238, 243 Vasquez v. Hillery (1986) 474 US. 2540cecen eee eee e nee 299 Victor v. Nebraska (1994) 511 US.1ccceee teen nent n eens 124 Wainwright v. Witt (1985) 469 U.S. 412 0...eteens passim Walters v. Maass (9th Cir. 1995) 45 F.3d 1355 2...eeeeee ees 101 Walton v. Arizona (1990) 497 ULS. 6392.eee ee eee tenn en eees 274 Wardius v. Oregon (1973) 412 U.S. 4702ceee eee eens 310 XXVii TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Page(s) Washington v. Rucenco (2006) 548 U.S. 212...ence eee eens 295 Watkins v. Murray (1989) 493 U.S. 907 0.cccee teen e eee nen 271 Welborn v. Gacy (7th Cir. 1993) 994 F.3d 305 2...eeecee ees 271, 274 Wiggins v. Smith (2003) 539 U.S. 510 1... eecece cnet teens 233, 275 Williams v. Runnels (9th Cir. 2006) 432 F.3d 1102 ................00008. 28, 29, 34, 35, 38 Witherspoonv.Illinois (1968) 391 U.S. S102ccee eens passim Witt v. Wainwright (1985) 470 U.S. 1039 0...ccceen eens 165 Woodsonv. North Carolina (1976) 428 U.S. 2800.eeeeens passim Woratzeck v. Stewart (9th Cir. 1996) 97 F.3d329 2.0...eee145 Zant v. Stephens (1983) 462 U.S. 862 2...ceeen eeas passim STATE CASES Aydelott v. Superior Court (1970) 7 Cal.App.3d 718 0.0... ceceeee een eens 61 Berry v. State (Miss. 1997) 703 So.2d 269 21... eeeee teenies 189 XXVili TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Page(s) Buzgheia v. Leasco Sierra Grove (1997) 60 Cal.App.4th 374 22... ceecceee 134-135 Caldwell v. State (Miss. 1983) 443 So.2d 806.2... . ceceeeeee 214 Cargle v. State (Ok. Cr. App. 1995) 909 P.2d 806.1... eee ee ee ee eee 194 Carlos v. Superior Court (1983) 35 Cal.3d 131 2... cee eee ee eee ees 139 Clark v. State (Tex.Crim.App. 1996) 929 S.W.2d5 2.0... . cee ee ees 180, 182 Conoverv.State (OKI.Cr. 1997) 933 P.2d 904 2... ceceeee ences 189 Cummiskey v. Superior Court (1992) 3 Cal.4th 1018 2...ceceee eens 119 Farina v. State (Fla. 1996) 680 So.2d 392 0...Lece eeeee 182 Fuselier v. State (Miss. 1985) 468 S0.2d 45 2...ceeteens 183 In re Anthony T. (1980) 112 Cal.App.3d 92 2.0... eee eee cee eens 58 In re Hess (1955) 45 Cal.2d 171 2...cececence nnnes 123 In re Marquez (1992) 1 Cal 4th 584 occcece eee nees 322 XX1X TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Page(s) In re Mendez (1979) 23 Cal.3d 847 2...eceee teens 30 In re Walters (1995) 39 Cal.App.4th 1546 2.0... 1c. eee eee eee eee ee 293, 294 Jarrell v. State (Ga. 1992) 413 S.E.2d 710...eeeees 183 McConnell v. State (Nev. 2004) 102 P.3d 606 ............ 0. eee eee eee 148, 149, 150 Neal v.State of California (1960) 55 Cal.2d 11 2...ceceeee ees 294 NewJersey v. Rose (N.J. 1988) 548 A.2d 1058...cceee ee eee 269 People v. Adcox (1988) 47 Cal.3d 207 .. 0...ceeeee 240, 254, 272 ‘People v. Adrian (1982) 135 Cal.App.3d 335 1.0.0... eeeeceee 245 People v. Alcala (1984) 36 Cal.3d 604 2...oeeeeae 64, 69, 103, 109 People v. Allen (2004) 115 Cal.App.4th 542 20...ceeeee ee 33 People v. Anderson (1987) 43 Cal.3d 1104 0...eeeeee 139 People v. Anderson (2001) 25 Cal.4th 543 2...eeeeee 254, 302, 303, 307 XXX TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Page(s) People v. Andrews (1989) 49 Cal.3d 200 1.0... eeeeecee 215, 217 People v. Archer : (2000) 82 Cal.App.4th 1380 2.0... cece cee eens 320 People v. Arias (1996) 13 Cal.4th 92 2...ceeeee passim People v. Avila (2006) 38 Cal.4th 491 2...eecece eens 315 People v. Bacigalupo (1993) 6 Cal.4th 457 ooccceee nes 309 People v. Balcom (1994) 7 Cal.4th 414 Jo.eeee ee eee passim People v. Balderas (1985) 41 Cal.3d 144 ........cbc ence ence cette eee ee eeas 62 People v. Bean (1990) 46 Cal.3d919 2...cece ee ees 58, 59, 79 People v. Belmontes (1983) 34 Cal.3d 335 2... ceceeee eee eee 289, 290 People v. Benson (1990) 52 Cal.3d 754 2.0...Leeeee eee 201, 213-214, 253 People v. Black (2005) 35 Cal.4th 1238 2...eeeee teens 281 People v. Blair (2005) 36 Cal.4th 686 2.0... cece eee eee een eee 301, 303 XXX1 TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Page(s) People v. Bland (2002) 28 Cal.4th 313 0.eecteee eens 273 People v. Bolin (1998) 18 Cal.4th 297 2...ccceet ees 30 People v. Box (2000) 23 Cal.4th 1153 2...eeccc cee ee eee 120, 122 People v. Boyd (1985) 38 Cal.3d 762 .............. Lecce cece eee eee eee nee 191 People v. Bradford (1969) 70 Cal.2d 333 1... Lecceteenies 173, 181 People v. Bradford (1997) 15 Cal.4th 1229. 0.2... eee eee eee 62, 81, 119, 121 People v. Breaux (1991) 1 Cal.4th 281 2...ceeeee eee 308 People v. Brown (1985) 40 Cal.3d 512 2...ccene nes passim People v. Brown (1988) 46 Cal.3d 432 2...ceeeee ee 211, 267, 322 People v. Brown (2004) 34 Cal.4th 382 oo.eece eee eae 301 People v. Bruner (1995) 9 Cal.4th 1546 ©... 2. eee eee eaecece eee nee 294 People v. Burns (1969) 270 Cal.App.2d 238 2.0... cece eee ee eee 58 XXX1i TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Page(s) People v. Caitlin (2001) 26 Cal.4th 81...ccence een eee 72 People v. Calderon (1994) 9 Cal.4th 69 2...ceecttees ... 84 People v. Carpenter (1997) 15 Cal.4th 312 .. 0...eeeeee eens 120 People v. Carter (2005) 36 Cal.4th 1114 2...ecteens 271 People v. Caudillo (1980) 101 Cal.App.3d 122 ... 0... eeeeee tees 294 People v. Champion (1995) 9 Cal.4th 879 2...cccete tenes 311 People v. Chessman (1959) 52 Cal.2d 467 0.0... eecee eesre 76 People v. Cleveland (2004) 32 Cal.4th 704 0... ieee cece ee eee eee eee 125, 133 People v. Coleman (1989) 48 Cal.3d 112 2...ceeeee 282, 283, 297 People v. Cook (2006) 39 Cal.4th 566 ...... 0... cece eee eee 57, 315, 316, 319 People v. Cook (2007) 40 Cal.4th 1334 2.0... ceceee eeseae 177 People v. Cox (1991) 53 Cal. 3d 618 2.0... cece ccc eens 198, 201, 203 XXXIli TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Page(s) People v. Crandell (1988) 46 Cal.3d 833 0.0... cece cece cnc eee e ene e ences 266 People v. Crittenden (1994) 9 Cal.4th 83 2...keeeee ees 125, 133, 134 People v. Davenport (1985) 41 Cal.3d 247 12...eeeeeeLakes 246, 259, 316 People v. Davis (1995) 10 Cal.4th 463 2.0...ccceee e eens 117 People v. Dillon (1983) 34 Cal.3d 441.0... ee eee eee eee 120, 121, 122, 138 People v. Duncan (1991) 53 Cal.3d 955 2...ceee eee passim People v. Dyer (1988) 45 Cal.3d 26 2.0... cececet en eaes 254, 275 People v. Earp (1999) 20 Cal.4th 826 1.0... . eeeeeeene 139-140 People v. Easley (1983) 34 Cal. 3d 858 2...ccceee 220, 266 People v. Edelbacher (1989) 47 Cal.3d 983 0...eeeee eee 101, 254, 259, 299 People v. Edwards (1991) 54 Cal.3d 787 2... cececece eee eens passim People v. Ernst (1994) 8 Cal.4th 441 2.ceeee eens 276 XXXIV TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Page(s) People v. Estrada (1995) 11 Cal.4th 568 2...eeeeee eee tenes 273 People v. Ewoldt (1994) 7 Cal.4th 380 2...ecccc tees passim People v. Fairbank (1997) 16 Cal.4th 1223 0...eeeee eee 302 People v. Falsetta (1999) 21 Cal.4th 903 2...eeeec eee eee 88, 109 People v. Farmer (1989) 47 Cal.3d 888 2.0... .ceceeet ene 269 People v. Fauber (1992) 2 Cal.4th 792 2...ceceeee eens 198, 314 People v. Felix (1993) 14 Cal.App.4th 997 2...eccece eee eens 87 People v. Fernandez (1990) 226 Cal.App.3d 669 2.0...ceeee ee eee passim People v. Fierro (1991) 1 Cal.4th 173 2.eccece ee 191, 317-318 People v. Flood (1998) 18 Cal.4th 470 2...ceetenes 127 People v. Frank (1933) 130 Cal.App.212 02... cceccee ete eens 61 People v. Friend (1957) 54 Cal.2d 749 0...ccctenn e en neaes 272 XXXV TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Page(s) People v. Fuentes (1991) 54 Cal.3d 707 2.0...eeeeee eee passim People v. Fuller (1982) 136 Cal.App.3d 403 1.2...eeeee eee ees 33 People v. Gallego (1990) 52 Cal.3d 115 2...ceceeee eens ..... 30 People v. Garceau (1993) 6 Cal.4th 1406 2.0...eeeeee eee .... 63, 89 People v. Ghent (1987) 43 Cal.3d 739 2... 0.eecteee ee 319 People v. Gibson (1976) 56 Cal.App.3d 119 2... cc eee ee ee eee 101, 102, 114 People v. Gonzales (1990) 51 Cal.3d.1179 2...eceee eae 129 People v. Goodridge (1969) 70 Cal.2d 824 2...cece cee eee eee 179 People v. Gordon (1990) 50 Cal.3d 1223 2... 2.eeeeens 101, 225 People v. Granice 1875) 50 Cal. 447 2.ccceee eee es 118 People v. Grant (2003) 113 Cal.App.4th 579 oo. .eeeeee eee e eee 84, 86 People v. Gray (2005) 37 Cal.4th 168 2.0... eeceeeee teens 166 XXXVI TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Page(s) © People v. Green (1980) 27 Cal.3d 1... ceecccece ene 117, 138 People v. Griffin (2004) 33 Cal.4th 536 2... cece ccc eee teen ences 303 People v. Guerrero (1976) 16 Cal.3d 719. 2.ceceteens passim People v. Gutierrez (2002) 28 Cal.4th 1083 2... eeeccc eee tee eens 57 People v. Hall (1983) 35 Cal.3d 161 2...eeccceee 45, 46, 47 People v. Hamilton (1963) 60 Cal.2d 105 2...eccece eens 322 People v. Hamilton (1988) 46 Cal.3d 123 0...eecee eee teen eee 272 People v. Hamilton (1989) 48 Cal.3d 1142 2...eeeeee 316 People v. Hansen (1994) 9 Cal4th 300 2...ceceeee eee 117 People v. Hardy (1992) 2 Cal4th 86 2.0...eeetet eee 311 People v. Harris (2005) 37 Cal.4th 310 2...eeeeee ee eee ee 267, 273 People v. Harrison (2005) 35 Cal.4th 208 2... 0...eeeet ene eens 64 XXXVII TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Page(s) People v. Hart (1999) 20 Cal.4th 546 1...eeecee eee 117, 121 People v. Harvey (1984) 163 Cal.App.3d90 .... 2...eeeeee eee passim People v. Haskett (1982) 30 Cal. 3d 841 «0...eee eee 211, 218, 253, 266 People v. Hawthorne (1992) 4 Cal.4th 43 oo.ceeeene nents 302 People v. Hayes (1999) 21 Cal.4th 1211 2...ceccc nene 166 People v. Hayes (1990) 52 Cal.3d 577 2... cece ee ee ene nee ees 139, 321 People v. Heard (2003) 31 Cal.4th 946 2.0...ceceeee ene nee passim People v. Henderson (1977) 19 Cal.3d 86 2... eee ccc eee teen nes 121, 123 People v. Hillhouse 2002) 27 Cal.4th 469 0.0.0... eee eee ees 261, 316, 319 People v. Holt (1984) 37 Cal.3d 436 0.0... ccccccent ence eens 321 People v. Holt (1997) 15 Cal.4th 619 2...ect 67, 103-104 People v. Hughes (2002) 27 Cal.4th 287 2... cece ce eee een ees 67, 119, 120 XXXVili TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Page(s) People v. Jackson (1996) 13 Cal.4th 1164 2...cece eeeeens 125 People v. Jenkins (2000) 22 Cal.4th 900 2... .eceects 267 People v. Jennings (1991) 53 Cal.3d 334 2...eccece eens 133, 134 People v. Johnson (1993) 6 Cal4th1.eeeeee 139, 263 People v. Johnson (2003) 30 Cal.4th 1302 2...0.ceeeee 32, 37 People v. Jones (1998) 17 Cal.4th 279...ecttenes 127 People v. Jones (2003) 29 Cal.4th 1229 2... cee ccc eee eee eens 166 People v. Kainzrants (1996) 45 Cal.App.4th 1068 .......... enn ee ee ence eee e eens 134 People v. Karis (1988) 46 Cal.3d 612 2... eeeeccee teenies 272 People v. Kaurish (1990) 52 Cal.3d 648 2... ceceee eee 167, 176, 201 People v. Keenan (1988) 46 Cal.3d 478 2...eccee eee n eens 73 People v. Kelly (1980) 113 CalApp.3d 1005 1.0... eeeceeees 310 XXX1X TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Page(s) People v. Kemp (1961) 55 Cal.2d 458 0...ceence ene ens 61 People v. Kennedy (2005) 36 Cal.4th 595 2.eceeeeee eens 301 People v. Kirkpatrick (1994) 7 Cal.4th 988 2.0...ceeens 272 People v. Kobrin (1995) 11 Cal.4th 416 2...eects 123 People v. Kraft (2000) 23 Cal.4th 978 2...eccet eee eens 245 People v. Kronemyer (1987) 189 Cal.App.3d 314 2.0... eeeeeeee 103 People v. Lang (1989) 49 Cal.3d 991 2...eeeeee eee ees 270, 272 People v. Lanphear (1980) 26 Cal.3d 814 2...eeeeee eee eens 181 People v. Lanphear (1980) 28 Cal.3d 463 2.0...cceee eee ences 181 People v. Lanphear (1984) 36 Cal.3d 164 2...cecent neee 212 People v. Latimer (1993) 5 Cal.4th 1203 2...cette eee ee 294 People v. Lawley (2002) 27 Cal.4th 102 2.0...eeeeee tenes 198 xl TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Page(s) People v. Lenart (2004) 32 Cal.4th 1107 22...eeecee ene 65, 304 People v. Leung (1992) 5 Cal.App.4th 482 2...eeeee eee 285 People v. Lewis (2001) 25 Cal.4th 610 0...eceee eens 101 People v. Lucas (1995) 12 Cal.4th 415 2...ceeeen nee 177-178 People v. Lucero (2003) 23 Cal.4th 692 2.0... ceceeee teens 272 People v. Lucky (1988) 45 Cal.3d 259...cececece eee een eees 79 People v. Malone (1988) 47 Cal.3d 1 oo.ccceee tenn nes 271 People v. Manriquez (2005) 37 Cal.4th 547 00.ccceet teen enes 319 People v. Marshall’ (1990) 50 Cal.3d 907 2...ceeens 253, 272 People v. Mason (1991) 52 Cal.3d 909 2.0...ceceteen eens 74 People v. Matson (1974) 13 Cal.3d 35 2... ccc cee een te tne e eens 77 People v. Mayfield (1997) 14 Cal.4th 668 0.0...ccccece eenes 255 xli TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Page(s) People v. McCain (1988) 46 Cal.3d97 2.0...cccee eet etn nes 272 People v. McDermott (2002) 28 Cal.4th 946 2.2...eeeeee eee 30, 31 People v. McGee (2006) 38 Cal.4th 682 2.0... ceceeet eee nee 286 People v. Medina (1995) 11 Cal.4th 694 occcette ees 306 People v. Melton (1988) 44 Cal. 3d 713 oo.ectenters 216 People v. Mickey (1991) 54 Cal.3d 713 2... ceceeee cee eens 245 People v. Miller (2006) 145 Cal.App.4th 206 ......... cee eee eee eee 291 People v. Mincey (1992) 2 Cal.4th 408 2...cece eee een eens 272 People v. Monterrosso (2004) 34 Cal.4th 743 2...eectee eee 267 People v. Montiel (1993) 5 Cal.4th 877 2... ceecee eee eee 184, 191, 272 People v. Montoya (1994) 7 Cal.4th 1027 2.0...ceeeee 67, 201 People v. Moore (1954) 43 Cal.2d 517 0...eeeene enn eae 310 xlii TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Page(s) People v. Morse (1964) 60 Cal.2d 631 2... ceceeee eee n nee 76 People v. Moten (1991) 229 Cal.App.3d 1318 20... eee eee ete eee eee 94 People v. Motton (1985) 39 Cal.3d 595 1...eecee ete e eens 34 People v. Murat (1873) 45 Cal. 281 2...ceeee eee nen ene neas 118 People v. Musselwhite (1998) 17 Cal.4th 1216 2... eeeceeeee 57, 58, 139 People v. Nakahara (2003) 30 Cal.4th 705 2... cece ccc eee een eens 121 People v. Noguera (1992) 4 Cal.4th 599 2...ceeee eee ees 133 People v. Ochoa (1998) 19 Cal.4th 353 2.ceeeen eens 57 People v. Osband (1996) 13 Cal.4th 622. 2...ccee ene aes 198 People v. Padilla (1995) 11 Cal.4th 891 2...ceeens 76 People v. Phillips (2000) 22 Cal.4th 226 1.2...eeeete e nee 177 People v. Pinholster (1992) 1 Cal.4th 865 2...ceetnt ences 177 xliii TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Page(s) People v. Poggi (1988) 45 Cal.3d 306 .. 0...ectnenneeneee 272 People v. Pollock (2004) 32 Cal.4th 1153 2...eceee eee 271 People v. Poon (1981) 125 Cal.App.3d 55 2... ccc cece et nee e ens 64 People v. Prieto (2003) 30 Cal.4th 226 2...ceceteen nes 303, 305 People v. Raley (1992) 2 Cal.4th 870 2.0...ccceee eens 194 People v. Rice (1976) 59 Cal.App.3d 998 0... keeeee eee eens 310 People v. Riel (2000) 22 Cal.4th 1153 ..........00...nec n eee eee n ene en ences 133 People v. Rincon-Pineda (1915675) 14 Cal.3d 864 0.0... eeece eee eee eees 246 People v. Rivers (1993) 20 Cal.App.4th 1040 2...ceceeee ens 130 People v. Robertson (1982) 33 Cal.3d 21 1... . ee cece eee eens 90, 261 People v. Roder (1983) 33 Cal.3d 491 2...ceeee 124, 128, 136 People v. Rodrigues (1994) 8 Cal.4th 1060 1... eeeeeee eee 213 xliv TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Page(s) People v. Sanders (1990) 51 Cal.3d 471 0.ceceeee ene eee 177, 311 People v. Sanders (1995) 11 Cal.4th 475.0.eccece eee eee 245, 254 People v. Schader (1969) 71 Cal.2d 761 21...cectee eens 102, 103 People v. Scheer (1998) 68 Cal.App.4th 1009 ....... eee ee eee eee 105 People v. Schmeck (2005) 37 Cal.4th 240 2...ceeee ee eee 125, 299 People v. Sears (1970) 2 Cal.3d 180 2...eeeeee eens 246, 264 People v. Sedeno (1974) 10 Cal.3d 703 2.0... ceceee eee eee 224, 303 People v. Sengpadychith (2001) 26 Cal.4th 316 2.0... eee ec ee eee nee nes 295, 318 People v. Silva . (2001) 25 Cal.4th 345 oo.ececceen ees passim People v. Smallwood (1986) 42 Cal.3d 415 2...eceee 63, 74, 79, 80. People v. Smith (2003) 30 Cal.4th 581 0...ceeene eens 273 People v. Smith . (2005) 35 Cal.4th 334 2...ccccect eens 312 xlv TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Page(s) _ People v. Smith (1984) 155 Cal.App.3d 359 2...kecee eens 289 People v. Smithey (1999) 20 Cal.4th 936 2...ceceeee ene 140, 273 People v. Snow (1987) 44 Cal.3d 216 0...ecttenet en neee 48 People v. Snow (2003) 30 Cal.4th 43 2...eeeccc teens 319 People v. Soto (1883) 63 Cal. 165 2...eeeeeeeee 119 People v. Stanley (1995) 10 Cal.4th 764 2...ceceeee eens 300 People v. Stanworth (1969) 71 Cal.2d 820 1.0... eee eeeeee e neces 181 People v. Steele (2002) 27 Cal.4th 1230 2...eceee ee eee 275 People v. Stewart (2004) 33 Cal.4th 425 oo...eeneens passim People v. Stewart (1983) 145 Cal.App.3d 967 2.0...cecceee eee 134 People v. Stitely (2005) 35 Cal.4th 514 2...cee ee ete nee 62 People v. Taylor (1990) 52 Cal.3d 719 2...eceee teens 305 xlvi TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Page(s) People v. Terry (1964) 61 Cal.2d.137 2.0.1 eeeeeeeen ees 204 People v. Thomas . (1990) 218 Cal.App.3d 1477 2.0... ce ccc eee eens 289 People v. Thompkins (1987) 195 Cal.App.3d 244 0.00.eeec eee eee 204 People v. Thompson (1980) 27 Cal.3d 303 2.0... eee eect eee enes passim People v. Thompson (1988) 45 Cal.3d 86 2...Leceee 64, 201, 203, 255 People v. Thompson (1990) 50 Cal.3d 134 2...eecc eee ene nes 30, 266 People v. Trevino (1985) 39 Cal.3d 667 2.0... ccc cc eee eee enn nenes 48 People v. Turner (1986) 42 Cal.3d 711 0... ieeecen ences passim People v. Turner (1990) 50 Cal.3d 668 2.0... eee ccc eeen eens 132 People v. Vaughn (1969) 71 Cal.2d 406 20...ceeect e ene 179 People v. Walker (1998) 47 Cal.3d 605 2...eccette teens 74 People v. Ward (2005) 36 Cal.4th 186 ..................Benet eee ee ees 308 xvii TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Page(s) People v. Wash (1993) 6 Cal.4th 215 2...cececece eee 191 People v. Watson (1981) 30 Cal.3d 290 0...ceceeee tenes 118, 121 People v. Welch (1999) 20 Cal.4th 701 2.2... eee eee ee eee e 177 People v. Westlake (1899) 124 Cal. 452 2...cccteen ene 134 People v. Wheeler (1979) 22 Cal. 3d 258 2...ceceeee passim People v. Williams (1971) 22 Cal. 3d 34 2...ceeeee es 321 People v. Williams (1988) 44 Cal.3d 883 0... ceceeee eee eee nes 305 People v. Wilson (2005) 36 Cal.4th 309 2... eee eceee 225, 229 People v. Wilson (1982) 135 Cal.App.3d 343 2.0... cee eeeeens 290 People v. Witt (1915) 170 Cal. 104 .............0..4. cece eee eee eens 119, 120 People v. Yeoman (2003) 31 Cal.4th 93 2...eeeeee ee 89, 90, 261 Riley v. State (Tex.Cr.App. 1994) 889 S.W.2d 290 0...eeeeee 183 xlviii TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Page(s) Rogers v. Superior Court (1955) 46 Cal.2d 3 0...ecc eee ete e eens 118 State v. Bernard (La. 1992) 608 So.2d 966 2.1...eeecece nena 192 State v. Clark (N.M. 1999) 990 P.2d 793 2...eeeeee nee ees 192 State v. Fortin (N.J. 2004) 843 A.2d974 2...centnenee 123 State v. Gregory (N.C. 1995) 459 S.E.2d 638 2...eceee eens 150 State v. Middlebrooks (Tenn. 1992) 840 S.W.2d 317 2... ccceects 145 State v. Muhammad (N.J. 1996) 678 A.2d 164... 0...ceeeens 189, 192 State v. Nesbit (Tenn. 1998) 978 S.W.2d 872 1... eeeee eee 189, 192 State v. Taylor (La. 1996) 669 So.2d 364 2...kceee ene ents 189 Williams v. Superior Court . (1984) 36 Cal.3d 441 2...eeeeee eee passim CONSTITUTIONS Cal. Const. art. 1 §§ |81, 94, 247 Tic cece eee eee e eens passim 1d Lecce eee eens passim 16... eeeec eee eens passim passim xlix TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Page(s) U.S. Const., Amends See cece eee tee eee ee passim Oc ccc cee eee eee teens passim Beeeee ee eens passim 14.......... Lee cece eee passim U.S. Const., Art. VI, § Lech 2 .oeceee ee 155 FEDERAL STATUTES 18 U.S.C., § 3591, subd. (a)(2) ...... eee eee eee 150 STATE STATUTES Cal. Evid. Code, §§ 210... ee eee eee eee eee eee ee 94 a) 94, 103 eens 94, 107 B55 Leeeee eee e ene 88 1 304 1101, subd. (a)... 0... ee eee ee ees 94 Cal. Pen. Code, §§ 187 Loe eee eee eee 2, 237, 119 189... eee eee eee eee Lecce eee 137, 237 190, subd. (a)... eee eee eee eee 123 190.2 0... eeeeee eee 237 190.2, subd. (a)(17)(D) «0. eee ee eee eee 2 190.2, subd. (a)(17)Gil) .. 2... eee ee 2 190.2, subd. (a)(17)(iv) «26... eee eee 2 190.2, subd. (a)(17)(vil)..........--.. 2, 137 190.3... eee eee eee eee 237, 240 72passim 3 245, subd. (a)(1) 2... eee eee ee 1,3 261 Lecceet eens 2 261, subd. (2) ......... eee eee eee 2, 279 286, subd. (Cc)... 0... ee eee eee ee 2, 279 459eeeee eee 1, 2, 279, 292 607.5 Loe eee eee eee eee 284, 296, 297 TABLE OF AUTHORITIES 720 ILCS Mont. Code Ann., §§ Nev.Rev.Stat., § Cal. Rules of Court, rules Page(s) 664 2.eee eens 16, 20, 283 O67 2. cece cee teens 1,3, 19 667.5, subd. (b) ........ eee eee eee 1,3, 19 667.6, subd. (c) ........ 2. ee eee eee eee 283 667.6, subd. (d) ..... ee eee eee eee 288 0294 1158a .. cececee ees 306 1170, subd. (a)(3) .........-.-...-. 284, 295 1170, subds. (b)-(c) ........ 0... .00 208. 283 T1701 cei eeeeee eee 283 1170.1, subd. (a) .... eee eee eee 288 1170.3... ccc ee ccc eee eens 283 1192.7, subd. (c)(23) 0... . eee eee eee 3 1239, subd. (b) 1...eee eee 6 1259... eee ee ee eeeeee e eee 127, 130 1469 ooeee127 1538.5 Loleee eee eeee 5 12022, subd. (b).............. 3, 4, 284, 297 5/9-1(b)(6)(b) . 2.eeeeee 149 A4S-5-102(1)(b) 2... eee ee 150 46-18-3032... ceceeee 150 200.030(4)(a) 2... eee eee eee 237 COURT RULES 4.42, subd. (b) ... 0... eee ee eee eee 318 4.42, subd. (€) ....... cece eee 318 AADS Lecceeeeveces 283 4.420, subd. (a) .....-.. eee ee eee 288 4.420, subd. (d) .............0000e 285, 296 4.421, subd. (b)(2) ... 60.2... dee eee 286 4.421, subd. (b)(5) .... 0. eee ee eee 286 278 a283, 289 li TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Page(s) 4A26 Loccence 289 4,426, subd. (b) .......... 00.00 c eee ee 289 4.439 Llccee eens 283 A44l oocee282, 283 4.441, subd. (c) ...... eee eee eee eee 283 4443ceecece ees 283 8.200 2. icc ccc eee eee tenes 6 JURY INSTRUCTIONS CALCRIM,Nos. 763 occ ccc cette eee nes passim TO4 Loc ccc eee eee 90, 114, 261, 262 766 oo ccc ccc eee eee 231, 264, 270, 311 CALJIC, Nos. 1.00 ... occ cece ce eee es 266 2cceee een eens 133 2SO Loc ccc een een cee ete 100 ZL Lccee ence eee eees 133 | 125 rr116, 138 8.84 oeeee eee 231 B.84.1cceee eee 267 8.85 Lice eee tenes passim 6rc302 B87 ccc cc eee cee teen eens 302, 307 8.88 Loeee ees 231, 302, 308 TEXT AND OTHER AUTHORITIES 2 Jefferson, California Evidence Bench Book (2d ed. 1982) § 33.6 0.0... cece eee tet e eens 65 American Convention on HumanRights,art. 4(2) Nov. 22,1969 0...cecette een eee een eenee 152 Bowers, The Capital Jury Project: Rationale, Design, and Preview ofEarly Findings (1995) 70 Ind. L.J. 1043 ............000. 268 li TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Page(s) Bowers & Steiner, Death by Default: An Empirical Demonstration ofFalse and Forced Choices in Capital Sentencing (1999) 77 Tex. L. Rev. 605 1.0... ceceee eee eens 230 Cal. Stds. Jud. Admin., § 5...eeeeee eee 246 Economic and Social Council res. 1984/50, GA Res. 39/118 oo.eeeeee e enn nnes 153 Haney, Violence and the Capital Jury: Mechanisms ofMoral Disengagement and the Impulse to Condemn to Death (1997) 49 Stan. L. Rev. 1447 0...eeeee eee 268, 269 Haney, Hurtado & Vega, Death Penalty Attitudes: The Beliefs ofDeath Qualified Californians (1992) 19 CACJ Forum No. 4 2...ceeeee 230 Haney & Lynch, Clarifying Life and Death Matters: An Analysis ofInstructional Comprehension and Penalty Phase Closing Arguments (1997) 21 Law & Hum. Beh. 575 ..... 273, 275 Haney & Lynch, Comprehending Life and Death Matters (1994) 18 Law & Hum. Behav. 411 ....... 0... eee eee eee 274 Haney, Sontag & Costanzo, Deciding to Take a Life: Capital Juries, Sentencing Instructions, and the Jurisprudence ofDeath (1995) 50 J.Soc. Issues 149 ........ 230, 268, 269 Higginbotham, Juries and the Death Penalty (1991) 41 Case W. Res. L.Rev. 1047 2.0... . ccc cee ccc eee ee 267 Hoffman, Where's the Buck? — Juror Misperception ofSentencing Responsibility in Death Penalty Cases (1995) 70 Ind. L.J.1137 2...eects268 Human Rights Committee, General Comment6(16),917 ........... 152 liti TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Page(s) Luginbuhl & Howe, Discretion in Capital Sentencing Instructions: Guided or Misguided (1995) 70 Ind.L.J. 1161 ........ 0... eee 274 Murphy & Hampton, Mercy and Legal Justice in Forgiveness and Mercy (1988) 2.cececece teen teen nee neas 214 Ramon, Bronson & Sonnes-Pond, Fatal Misconceptions: Convincing Capital Jurors that LWOP Means Forever (1994) 21 CAC] Forum No. 2 2.0... . eeeee nes 230 Report of the Former Governor Ryan’s Commission on Capital Punishment April 15,2002 2.0.0... cececee tenet e ne aes 151 Report of the Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial, Summary or Arbitrary Executions, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/79/ADD.85, § 13 November 19, 1997 0.0... ccceeeeee ee neee 153 Restatement(Third) of the Foreign Relations Law of the United States, § 103 cmt.c ........... eee eee eee 153 Shatz & Rivkind, The California Death Penalty Scheme: Requiemfor Furman? (1997) 72 N.Y.U. L.Rev. 1283 2.0... cee cece eee 150, 240 Tiersma, Dictionaries and Death: Do Capital Juries Understand Mitigation? (1995) Utah L.Rev. 1 2... 0...eectn nee 272 Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary (1981) Tenth Ed. ................4.ence eee ence e eee eeees 214 liv DECLARATION OF SERVICE Re: People v. Royce Lyn Scott No. 8064858 I, Victoria Morgan, declare that I am over 18 years of age, and not a party to the within cause; my business address is 221 Main Street, 10th Floor, San Francisco, California 94105. A true copy of the attached: APPELLANT’S LETTER OF ERRATA on each of the following, by placing samein an envelope (or envelopes) addressed (respectively) as follows: JENNIFER A. JADOVITZ Deputy Attorney General 110 W. “A”Street, Suite 1100 P. O. Box 85266 San Diego, CA 92186 Royce Lyn Scott (Appellant) (Hand Delivered by Counsel) Eachsaid envelope wasthen, on February 15, 2008, sealed and deposited in the United States Mail at San Francisco, California, the county in which I am employed, with the postage thereon fully prepaid. I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true andcorrect. Executed on February 15, 2008, at San Francisco DECLARANT