The Supreme Court first held that defendant’s contention that his prior Texas conviction in 1980 did not qualify as a prior murder for purposes of California’s special circumstances statute was barred by law of the case, since a pretrial decision by the Court of Appeal concluded otherwise. However, the court also addressed the merits of the argument, finding that defendant’s conviction for both intentionally and knowingly shooting the victim eliminated any uncertainty as to whether his act qualified as an implied malice murder under California law.