# People v. Easley

> California Supreme Court · November 7, 1983 · 34 Cal. 3d 858

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9790136

## Case

- **Full name:** The PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. ELBERT LEE EASLEY, Defendant and Appellant
- **Court:** California Supreme Court
- **Decided:** November 7, 1983
- **Citations:** 34 Cal. 3d 858; 196 Cal. Rptr. 309; 671 P.2d 813; 1983 Cal. LEXIS 247
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Mosk
- **Judges:** Mosk, Richardson, Kaus
- **Cited by:** 205 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/9790136

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- recognizing that unadorned factor (k) had significant potential for jury confusion.
- noting arguments on both sides

## Opinion text

MOSK, J.
I concur in the judgment affirming as to guilty and agree that the judgment must be reversed as to penalty because of the serious error of the trial court in instructing the jury under the 1978 death penalty law rather than the 1977 law.
However, I cannot join the majority in its criticism of the instruction barring the jury from being swayed by mere sympathy. On that issue I adhere to the views expressed in my dissenting opinion in People v. Bandhauer (1970) 1 Cal.3d 609, 619 [ 83 Cal.Rptr. 184 , 463 P.2d 408 ]. In the current climate of public opinion, sympathy is more likely to be aroused for the victim and his family than for a defendant who has been found guilty of a brutal first degree murder. Thus cautioning a jury in the penalty phase of the trial not to be swayed by mere sympathy redounds to the benefit, not the detriment, of the defendant.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9790136. Public record. Not legal advice.