Case ID: so3d_243/html/0854-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "MAIN, Justice. MURDOCK, Justice (dissenting).", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

EX PARTE Ronnie Lynn KIRKSEY
    (In re: Ronnie Lynn Kirksey v. State of Alabama)
    1160522
    Supreme Court of Alabama.
    June 23, 2017
    Randall S. Susskind, Alicia A. D'Addario, and Jennifer R. Taylor of Equal Justice Initiative, Montgomery, for petitioner.
   MAIN, Justice.

WRIT DENIED. NO OPINION.

Stuart, C.J., and Bolin, Parker, Shaw, Wise, Bryan, and Sellers, JJ., concur.

Murdock, J., dissents.

MURDOCK, Justice (dissenting).

I would grant certiorari review in this capital case. Ronnie Lynn Kirksey, the petitioner, seeks review by this Court of a decision by the Court of Criminal Appeals upholding his sentence of death. The decision by the Court of Criminal Appeals follows certiorari review by the United States Supreme Court of the Court of Criminal Appeals' earlier decision upholding the petitioner's capital conviction and sentence of death and a remand by that Court to the Court of Criminal Appeals for further consideration of the sentence in light of the Supreme Court's holding in Hurst v. Florida, 577 U.S. ___, 136 S. Ct. 616 (2016). See Kirksey v. State, 191 So. 3d 810 (Ala. Crim. App. 2015), vacated, 578 U.S. ___, 136 S. Ct. 2409 (2016).

I am concerned that the issue whether the aggravating circumstances outweigh the mitigating circumstances in a capital case, as required for the imposition of the death penalty under Alabama law, sufficiently partakes of the nature of a factual inquiry so as to trigger the principles articulated in Hurst. I also believe this Court should further consider the petitioner's argument that the jury's verdict was constitutionally insufficient to support a death sentence because the jury was instructed that its verdict would merely be a recommendation.