Death penalty upheld, leaving hundreds of sentences intact

The state Supreme Court affirmed a death penalty verdict Thursday, rejecting a defense bid that could have affected hundreds of other similar appeals.

The high court asked whether the California Constitution requires that juries determine factually disputed aggravating factors beyond a reasonable doubt. Justice Goodwin H. Liu concluded it did not.

"In sum, while this court has previously imposed additional reliability requirements on the jury's consideration of aggravating evidence in the penalty phase, we hold that neither article I, Section 16 of the California Constitution nor Penal Code section 1042 provides a basis to require unanimity in the jury's determination of factually disputed aggravating circumstances," he wrote.

The outcome of the appeal was being closely watched because a victory for Don'te Lamont McDaniel could have led to hundreds of other convictions being vacated.

The appeal of McDaniel's 2009 conviction for killing two people and injuring two others five years earlier drew attention when the justices asked for supplemental briefing about whether the Penal Code and state Constitution require such unanimous determinations.

Greg Totten, executive director of the California District Attorneys Association, said a victory for McDaniel would have had "a huge impact" on other death penalty cases, possibly vacating scores of them.

"We're pleased with the outcome of the decision," he said in a phone interview. People v. McDaniel, 2021 DJDAR 8887 (S. Ct, filed Aug. 6, 2015).

Deputy Attorney General Dana M. Ali told the high court in June that imposing a higher burden on juries considering the death penalty "deserves serious consideration" by the state Legislature.

"But the answer to the legal question ... is that this court has never held that either the Penal Code or the Constitution in their present form requires those changes," she said during oral arguments.

Deputy State Public Defender Elias P. Batchelder, who represented McDaniel, criticized the court's ruling.

"We're greatly disappointed the court didn't address great flaws in the capital punishment system," he said in a phone interview after the ruling.

There are more than 700 people on death row in California, but the state has not executed anyone since 2007 and Gov. Gavin Newsom imposed a moratorium on the death sentence after he was sworn in.

Attorney General Rob Bonta, whose office defended the death penalty verdict, nonetheless criticized it in a statement after the decision.

"The attorney general personally believes that the death penalty is deeply flawed and immoral -- and that it's wrong for California," a representative wrote in an email. "In fact, as a legislator, he pushed for a constitutional amendment to abolish it.

The case drew a host of amicus briefs on both sides.

While the California District Attorneys Association asked the court to affirm McDaniel's death sentence, three progressive district attorneys -- San Francisco County District Attorney Chesa Boudin, Los Angeles County District Attorney George Gascon, and Santa Clara County District Attorney Jeremy Rosen -- disagreed and argued for a higher standard for the death penalty.

Liu rejected other defense challenges to the verdict. The main opinion was unanimous.

In a concurring opinion, which was not joined by any other justice, Liu raised questions about whether California's death penalty violates the Sixth Amendment as outlined in a 2000 U.S. Supreme Court case. Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466.

"There is a world of difference between a unanimous jury finding of an aggravating circumstance and the smorgasbord approach that our capital sentencing scheme allows," Liu wrote.

"Given the stakes for capital defendants, the prosecution, and the justice system, I urge this court, as well as other responsible officials sworn to uphold the Constitution, to revisit this issue at an appropriate time," he added.