Opinion ID: 1690126
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 10

Heading: should victim impact evidence have been allowed in jordan's sentencing trial?

Text: ś 96. Jordan alleges that the prosecution should have been prohibited from introducing evidence of the effect that Edwina Marter's death had on her family. However, in Wells v. State, 698 So.2d 497, 512-513 (Miss.1997), we held that victim impact evidence of this sort would be allowed in the sentencing phase of a capital murder trial. Specifically, we found that the United States Supreme Court had found that victim impact statements were not constitutionally barred by the Eighth Amendment. Id. at 513; see Payne v. Tennessee, 501 U.S. 808, 111 S.Ct. 2597, 115 L.Ed.2d 720 (1991). The Supreme Court stated, `A State may legitimately conclude that evidence about the victim and about the impact of the murder on the victim's family is relevant to the jury's decision as to whether or not the death penalty should be imposed.' Wells, 698 So.2d at 513 (quoting Payne, 111 S.Ct. at 2609). Therefore, this assignment of error is without merit.