# People v. Lewis

> California Supreme Court · May 17, 2001 · 25 Cal. 4th 610

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/5452355

## Case

- **Full name:** THE PEOPLE, and v. MILTON OTIS LEWIS, and
- **Court:** California Supreme Court
- **Decided:** May 17, 2001
- **Citations:** 25 Cal. 4th 610; 106 Cal. Rptr. 2d 629; 2001 Daily Journal DAR 4843; 22 P.3d 392; 2001 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 3958; 2001 Cal. LEXIS 3090
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurring in part by Mosk
- **Judges:** Kennard, Mosk
- **Cited by:** 592 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/5452355

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- holding that the prosecutor's reference to the nonexistence of mitigating evidence was not a comment on the defendant's failure to testify

## Opinion text

MOSK, J., Concurring and Dissenting.
I concur in the opinion of the court in all respects save one: I would vacate the sentence of death as unreliable, in violation of both the cruel and unusual punishments clause of the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution and also the cruel or unusual punishment clause of article I, section 17 of the California Constitution, because trial counsel—who would make practically no argument at all to persuade the jury to spare appellant’s life—introduced no evidence whatsoever to serve as a basis for it to do so. (See People v. Bradford (1997) 15 *679 Cal.4th 1229, 1385 [ 65 Cal.Rptr.2d 145 , 939 P.2d 259 ] (conc. & dis. opn. of Mosk, J.) [implying that any sentence of death should be vacated as unreliable under the Eighth Amendment and article I, section 17 if trial counsel introduced in mitigation none of the available evidence]; People v. Avena (1996) 13 Cal.4th 394, 449-450 [ 53 Cal.Rptr.2d 301 , 916 P.2d 1000 ] (dis. opn. of Mosk, J.) [same]; People v. Lucas (1995) 12 Cal.4th 415, 501-502 [ 48 Cal.Rptr.2d 525 , 907 P.2d 373 ] (conc. & dis. opn. of Mosk, J.) [same]; In re Ross (1995) 10 Cal.4th 184, 216, fn. 1 [ 40 Cal.Rptr.2d 544 , 892 P.2d 1287 ] (dis. opn. of Mosk, J.) [same]; People v. Stansbury (1995) 9 Cal.4th 824, 835 [ 38 Cal.Rptr.2d 394 , 889 P.2d 588 ] (conc. & dis. opn. of Mosk, J.) [same], reiterating People v. Stansbury (1993) 4 Cal.4th 1017, 1074 [ 17 Cal.Rptr.2d 174 , 846 P.2d 756 ] (conc. & dis. opn. of Mosk, J.), revd. sub nom. Stansbury v. California (1994) 511 U.S. 318 [ 114 S.Ct. 1526 , 128 L.Ed.2d 293 ] (by the court); People v. Diaz (1992) 3 Cal.4th 495, 577 [ 11 Cal.Rptr.2d 353 , 834 P.2d 1171 ] (conc. & dis. opn. of Mosk, J.) [same]; see also People v. Howard (1992) 1 Cal.4th 1132, 1197 [ 5 Cal.Rptr.2d 268 , 824 P.2d 1315 ] (conc. & dis. opn. of Mosk, J.) [finding a sentence of death unreliable under the Eighth Amendment and article I, section 17 when trial counsel introduced in mitigation none of the available evidence, albeit at the defendant’s request]; People v. Sanders (1990) 51 Cal.3d 471, 531-533 [ 273 Cal.Rptr. 537 , 797 P.2d 561 ] (dis. opn. of Mosk, J.) [same]; People v. Lang (1989) 49 Cal.3d 991, 1059-1062 [ 264 Cal.Rptr. 386 , 782 P.2d 627 ] (conc. & dis. opn. of Mosk, J.) [same]; People v. Williams (1988) 44 Cal.3d 1127, 1158-1161 [ 245 Cal.Rptr. 635 , 751 P.2d 901 ] (conc. & dis. opn. of Mosk, J.) [to similar effect under the Eighth Amendment]; People v. Deere (1985) 41 Cal.3d 353, 360-368 [ 222 Cal.Rptr. 13 , 710 P.2d 925 ] [same].)
Appellant’s petition for a rehearing was denied June 27, 2001.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/5452355. Public record. Not legal advice.