California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Mendoza, 24 Cal.4th 130, 6 P.3d 150, 99 Cal.Rptr.2d 485 (Cal. 2000):
Defendant faults the trial court for not instructing the jury that defendant's age was a mitigating factor. Chronological age, however, is neither aggravating nor mitigating, "but is used in the statute `as a metonym for any age-related matter suggested by the evidence or by common experience...."' (People v. Arias, supra, 13 Cal.4th at p. 188, 51 Cal. Rptr.2d 770, 913 P.2d 980.) The prosecutor's argument here that defendant was old enough to understand the wrongfulness of his conduct is a permissible agerelated inference. (Ibid.) Also permissible was the prosecutor's reference to the victim's age (65 years old), which is a circumstance of the offense admissible under section 190.3, factor (a).
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.