What is the jury's duty not to consider the subject of penalty or punishment in its deliberations?

California, United States of America


The following excerpt is from People v. Moore, 166 Cal.App.3d 540, 211 Cal.Rptr. 856 (Cal. App. 1985):

It is fundamental law in California that the trier of fact is not to consider the subject of penalty or punishment in arriving at its decision of guilt or innocence. (People v. Moore (1968) 257 Cal.App.2d 740, 750, 65 Cal.Rptr. 450 [similarity in names coincidental].) This notion derives from the traditional division of duty between the court and jury: a jury is to decide questions of fact placed before it; the court is to rule on questions of law. The issue of punishment being a question of law is exclusive to the court and therefore extraneous to the jury. To help focus the jury on its task and attempt to keep jurors from speculating on matters outside their function, [166 Cal.App.3d 550] California courts have prohibited any mention of post-verdict proceedings in jury instructions. The rule is perhaps most vividly illustrated in capital cases.

Other Questions


How have the jury been instructed to interpret the meaning of deliberate deliberate deliberate use of the word "deliberately" in the dictionary? (California, United States of America)
Is there any case law where a jury was ordered to reconstitute its deliberations after the trial court ordered that the jury had already retired from deliberations to consider the relevant material? (California, United States of America)
Can a jury member bring a Bible into the jury room during penalty phase deliberations? (California, United States of America)
Is it sufficient for the jury to consider the error in finding that the jury considered evidence from which it could have come to a verdict without reliance on reliance on the error? (California, United States of America)
In a penalty retrial of a convicted murderer, what is the effect of a hung jury at the penalty phase of his penalty trial? (California, United States of America)
Does section 190.3 of the California Criminal Code require a penalty phase jury to consider a defendant's unadjudicated criminal activity as a mitigating factor in the penalty phase? (California, United States of America)
Does section 654 of the California Death Penalty Act prohibit a penalty phase jury from considering separate crimes based on the same act of violence? (California, United States of America)
In a penalty case, in what circumstances will the court allow the jury to instruct the jury on a defendant's failure to testify in the penalty phase? (California, United States of America)
Can a jury at the penalty phase of a capital trial consider whether there is evidence in aggravation not placed before the jury? (California, United States of America)
What is the standard of response of a jury in a death penalty case where the jury is asked to consider the possibility of a Governor's commutation of a life without parole 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.