Appellant, William Satele, Reply Brief - California Courts - State of ...
Appellant, William Satele, Reply Brief - California Courts - State of ...
Appellant, William Satele, Reply Brief - California Courts - State of ...
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
VIII<br />
THE TRIAL COURT ERRED IN REFUSING APPELLANT'S<br />
REQUEST FOR AN INSTRUCTION INFORMING THE<br />
JURY THAT BEING IN THE COMPANY OF SOMEONE<br />
WHO HAD COMMITTED THE CRIME WAS AN INSUFFICIENT<br />
BASIS FOR PROVING APPELLANT'S GUILT<br />
The trial court erred in refusing appellant's request for an instruction<br />
infonning the jury that being in the company <strong>of</strong>someone who had committed the<br />
crime was an insufficient basis for proving guilt as an aider and abettor. This error<br />
had the effect <strong>of</strong> depriving appellant <strong>of</strong> the right to due process <strong>of</strong> law and the<br />
Eighth Amendment right to a reliable detennination <strong>of</strong> the facts in a capital case,<br />
thereby requiring a reversal <strong>of</strong>the judgment and death penalty verdict.<br />
A. This Claim Is Not Waived<br />
Respondent claims the constitutional aspects <strong>of</strong> this issue are forfeited<br />
because these claims were not raised at trial. (RB at p. 197.) Respondent is<br />
wrong.<br />
Under the principles discussed more fully above (ante, at pp. 21-27), this<br />
issue is not waived. These principles include the fact that an appellate court has<br />
inherent power to review an issue in spite <strong>of</strong> a party's failure to perfectly phrase<br />
that issue; the fact that there is an exception to the waiver rule regarding issues<br />
relating to the deprivation <strong>of</strong> fundamental, constitutional rights; and the fact that<br />
there is an exception to the waiver rule that provides that an objection may be<br />
excused when the issue involved is a pure question <strong>of</strong> law. Finally, because, as<br />
noted above, whether the waiver rule is to be applied is largely a question <strong>of</strong> the<br />
appellate court's discretion, this court should address the constitutional aspects <strong>of</strong><br />
this issue.<br />
88