Opinion ID: 1262413
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: Granting of motion for resentencing

Text: This Court has not addressed whether a different standard should be applied to a motion for a resentencing proceeding in a bifurcated capital case. The factors set forth in Caskey, supra , apply specifically to the guilt phase of a trial because the fourth factor refers to whether the newly discovered evidence is material to guilt or innocence. We now hold that the factors in Caskey apply to motions for resentencing proceedings with a modification of the fourth factor, such that the newly discovered evidence must be material to any mitigating or aggravating circumstances. In granting South's motion for a resentencing proceeding, Judge Smith held there is a significant possibility that the outcome of the sentencing could have been different. The State contends Judge Smith should not have granted South a resentencing proceeding unless the newly discovered evidence probably would change the result and, therefore, Judge Smith erred in applying the wrong standard. We agree. Judge Smith did not apply the correct standard and the granting of the motion for a resentencing proceeding is reversed and remanded for the correct standard to be applied. Affirmed in part; reversed in part; and remanded. HARWELL, C.J., and CHANDLER, FINNEY and TOAL, JJ., concur.