Opinion ID: 1127545
Heading Depth: 5
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Relishing the murder

Text: In the special verdict, the trial court noted that defendant was observed gambling in Laughlin the day after the murder. Defendant lost between $1,100 and $1,200 gambling, which may have been money that he stole from Irene. The pit boss at the casino agreed with defense counsel that defendant was quiet and not doing anything out of the ordinary when he was gambling. There is no evidence that defendant bragged about the crime. Cf. West, 176 Ariz. at 448, 862 P.2d at 208 (bragging about beating up some old man); State v. Runningeagle, 176 Ariz. 59, 65, 859 P.2d 169, 175, cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 114 S.Ct. 609, 126 L.Ed.2d 574 (1993) (laughing after murder and bragging about good fight). The day after the murder, defendant called his mother and told her: [H]e thought he had done a terrible thing. He thought he had killed Irene.... [H]e was going to kill himself. Although the fact that defendant gambled soon after killing Irene reflects a certain amount of callousness, it does not prove beyond a reasonable doubt that defendant relished the murder. Furthermore, there is no compelling proof that the money he lost gambling was Irene's. Therefore, we find that the state did not prove beyond a reasonable doubt that defendant relished the murder.