 |
|
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
State v. Henderson3/7/2001 to punishment. Secondly, as discussed previously herein, the evidence is amply sufficient to support the jury's finding that the appellants had previous convictions involving violence thereby establishing the aggravating circumstance found at Tennessee Code Annotated Section 39- 13-204(i)(2). Thirdly, the mitigating evidence consisted largely of testimony concerning the appellants' troubled lives, injuries, and personal setbacks. Contrasted with this was proof that the appellants had previously been convicted of a violent felony involving a death. The jury was justified in determining the aggravating circumstance outweighed the mitigating proof offered in this case.
Finally, we discuss whether the sentence of death is proportional in this case when compared to similar cases. This analysis is designed to identify aberrant, arbitrary or capricious sentences by determining whether the death penalty in a given case is "disproportionate to the punishment imposed on others convicted of the same crime." State v. Bland, 958 S.W.2d at 662 (Tenn. 1997). If a case is "plainly lacking in circumstances consistent with those in cases where the death penalty has been imposed," then the sentence is disproportionate. Id. at 668. However, a sentence of death is not disproportionate merely because the circumstances of the offense are similar to those of another offense for which the defendant has received a life sentence. Id. at 665. "Since no crimes are precisely alike, the precedent seeking method of review is not a rigid, mechanical formula." State v. Burns, 979 S.W.2d 276, 283 (Tenn. 1998). Instead, we consider numerous factors regarding the offense itself: (1) the means of death; (2) the manner of death; (3) the motivation for the killing; (4) the place of death; (5) the victim's age, physical and psychological condition; (6) the absence or presence of premeditation; (7) the absence or presence of provocation; (8) the absence or presence of justification; and (9) the injury to and effects on nondecedent victims. Bland, 958 S.W.2d at 667. We also consider numerous factors about the defendant: (1) age, race and gender; (2) prior criminal record; (3) mental, emotional, or physical condition; (4) role in the murder; (5) remorse; (6) cooperation with authorities; (7) the defendant's knowledge of a victim's helplessness; and (8) the defendant's potential for rehabilitation. Id.
The evidence in this case showed that after an afternoon spent drinking with Griffin, Appellants became angry with Griffin, fought with him, and abandoned him on the side of a highway. After a subsequent unsuccessful attempt to obtain Griffin's release from jail, Appellants set fire to Griffin's residence and then obtained a shotgun. Appellants then obtained Griffin's release from jail, took him to a remote area, and shot him in the back of the head with a shotgun. Appellants have continued to deny all responsibility for Griffin's murder and they have failed to show any remorse for the senseless and unprovoked killing of their supposed friend. The jury sentenced the Appellants to death after it found one aggravating circumstance: that the Appellants had previously been convicted of felonies involving the use of violence to the person.
In State v. Cribbs, 967 S.W.2d 773 (Tenn. 1998), the defendant killed a woman after the woman and her husband came home while the defendant and an accomplice were burglarizing their home. The defendant shot the husband in the shoulder, causing him to lose consciousness. The defendant then killed the wife by placing a shotgun against her head and firing. The jury imposed the death sentence after it found two aggravating circumstances: that the defendant was previously convicted of one or more felonies
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 Tennessee DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
|
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|