P. v. Edwards
Defendant Raheem Abdul Edwards appeals from the judgment entered after a jury found him guilty of first degree murder and found true special circumstance allegations that the murder was committed during the commission of a robbery and during the commission of a burglary within the meaning of Penal Code section 190.2, subdivision (a)(17)(A) and (G), respectively. (All further statutory references are to the Penal Code.) Defendant was sentenced to a prison term of life without the possibility of parole.
Defendant does not challenge his conviction for first degree murder. He argues the trial court committed prejudicial error when it instructed the jury on the special circumstance allegations on the ground the court did not expressly instruct the jury to separately consider those two allegations. Defendant argues this court should reverse the findings on the special circumstance allegations and remand the matter to the trial court with directions that he be sentenced to 25 years to life. Defendant also contends section 190.2 is unconstitutional.
We affirm. Even assuming the trial court erred by failing to expressly instruct the jury that it must separately consider the two special circumstance allegations, for the reasons we will explain, any such error would have been harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. As the California Supreme Court has upheld the constitutionality of section 190.2, subdivision (a)(17), we must reject defendant’s constitutional challenge to that statute. (See People v. Nelson (2011) 51 Cal.4th 198, 225.)
Comments on P. v. Edwards