In California, as in most death penalty jurisdictions, to sentence a defendant to death the fact-finder must make three determinations: (1) that the defendant committed a first-degree murder; (2) that the defendant meets the statutory criteria for death-eligibility; and (3) that, in light of the aggravating and mitigating factors, the defendant deserves the death penalty. In California, the first two determinations are made together at the guilt phase of the trial when the fact-finder decides whether the defendant is guilty of first-degree murder and whether any charged special circumstance is true. If the defendant is found guilty and a special circumstance is found true, the case proceeds to a penalty phase, where the fact-finder determines the defendant’s sentence. At the penalty phase, the fact-finder is directed to take into account a list of eleven factors, the first of which is “the circumstances of the crime of which the defendant was convicted in the present proceeding and the existence of any special circumstances found to be true.” The fact-finder will impose the death penalty if the fact-finder concludes that the aggravating circumstances outweigh the mitigating circumstances. The list of factors does not consist of propositional questions but instead directs the sentencer to consider certain subjects, and the sentencer is not required to make findings as to any of the factors. Nor is the sentencer limited by the direction to weigh aggravation against mitigation; rather, “each juror is free to assign whatever moral or sympathetic value he deems appropriate to each and all of the various factors he is permitted to consider” and to decide whether death is “the appropriate penalty under all the circumstances.”The breadth of death-eligibility under the California scheme is a product of the interplay between the definition of first-degree murder and the definition of the special circumstances. At present, there are twenty-one categories of first-degree murder, divided into two groups: eight categories of malice-murder, and thirteen categories of felony-murder. There are thirty-three separately enumerated special circumstances that render a first-degree murderer death-eligible, including twelve felony-murder special circumstances. The California Supreme Court has held unconstitutional on vagueness grounds the “heinous, atrocious or cruel” special circumstance, but all of the remaining special circumstances call for a relatively narrow factual determination by the fact-finder, in contrast with the more open-ended eligibility factors used in other states. Thirty of the remaining thirty-two special circumstances — all but the “prior murder” circumstance, and, in rare cases, the multiple-murder circumstance — single out purportedly aggravating circumstances of the crime itself.
Steven F. Shatz, The Eighth Amendment, the Death Penalty and OrdinaryRobbery-Burglary Murderers: A California Case Study41. Who is the fact-finder?42. In the context of the paragraphs, who is the sentencer?43. “The breadth of death-eligibility under the California scheme is a product of the interplay between the definition of first-degree murder and the definition of the special circumstances.” This sentence means ___.44. According to the last paragraph, how many of the felony-murder special circumstances is (are) not death-eligible?45. In California, the trial of a criminal case is divided into two stages: ___.A.Judge B.Court C.Policeman D.Jury
问题2：
A.Judge B.Court C.Defense lawyer D.Juror
问题3：
A.The definition of first-degree murder and the definition of the special circumstances are provided for in California law. B.Whether or not a person can be sentenced with death penalty depends on how the sentencer explains first-degree murder and the special circumstances. C.Whether or not a person can be sentenced with death penalty depends on how the sentencer combines first-degree murder with the special circumstances. D.Whether or not a person can be sentenced with death penalty depends on how the sentencer fits the fact situation into t
