Is post crime behavior considered in mitigation of a sentence?

California, United States of America


The following excerpt is from People v. Brady, 162 Cal.App.3d 1, 208 Cal.Rptr. 21 (Cal. App. 1984):

On the other side of the balance, a defendant's acknowledgment of wrongdoing at an early stage of the criminal process is post crime behavior which may be considered in mitigation of his punishment. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 423(b)(3).) Even though "the purpose of imprisonment ... is punishment" ( 1170, subd. (a)(1)), it makes no sense to draw an arbitrary line at the conclusion of the original sentencing proceeding and preclude consideration by subsequently resentencing courts of positive information regarding the defendant simply because he is statutorily ineligible for probation. (People v. Rojas, supra, 57 Cal.2d 676, 21 Cal.Rptr. 564, 371 P.2d 300 established that post crime conduct could be favorably considered with regard to the grant or denial of probation after remand for resentencing.)

Other Questions


Does a defendant who committed a crime under a different sentencing scheme that existed at the time he committed the crime be sentenced to a different sentence? (California, United States of America)
Can a defendant who served a prior prison sentence for non-sexually violent crimes receive additional enhancements to his sentence under section 12022.6 of the California Criminal Code when his sentence is not yet final? (California, United States of America)
How has the court considered age, mental health status at the time of the crime before sentencing a teenager who committed a crime as a juvenile? (California, United States of America)
Does the Attorney General have the authority to argue that a sentencing based on post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) must be considered as a mitigating factor in sentencing? (California, United States of America)
In what circumstances will a jury consider each crime and the relevant evidence in the order in which each crime should be considered? (California, United States of America)
In a capital crime case, how has the Court considered the sentencing of an accomplice as a factor in determining the upper term sentence? (California, United States of America)
Does section 190.3, subdivision (k) of the California Criminal Code require a jury to consider "any other circumstance which extenuates the gravity of the crime" as a mitigating factor in sentencing? (California, United States of America)
In what circumstances will a jury consider other crimes as aggravating factors in sentencing a convicted murderer's sentence? (California, United States of America)
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)
In what circumstances will a jury consider "other crimes" in determining a defendant's sentence? (California, United States of America)
X



Alexi white


"The most advanced legal research software ever built."

Trusted by top litigators from across North America.