Opinion ID: 1182224
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: THE ENMUND/McDANIEL FINDING

Text: As noted in Part 18(C)(1)(b), footnote 23, the majority concludes that the jury's implicit finding that defendant actually killed Mary satisfies Enmund v. Florida, 458 U.S. 782, 102 S.Ct. 3368, 73 L.Ed.2d 1140 (1982). Although I agree that the jury implicitly found that defendant actually killed Mary, I believe that Enmund requires an explicit finding that defendant did so, and would have this court make that finding based on the record. The record discloses not only that the jury implicitly found that defendant actually killed Mary, it also reveals that the the trial judge made a like finding. In his special verdict, the trial judge stated, While the giving of the felony murder instruction might under some circumstances be a mitigating factor, the court finds it no mitigation here where the defendant was the only participant in this offense. (Emphasis added.) While I believe that neither the jury's implicit finding nor the trial judge's implicit finding satisfies Enmund, these findings coupled with the rest of the record compel a finding that defendant actually killed Mary. Accordingly, and like the records in McDaniel and Gillies I, the record in this case allows this court to find, beyond a reasonable doubt, that defendant actually killed Mary. See State v. McDaniel, 136 Ariz. 188, 199-200, 665 P.2d 70, 81-82 (1983) ([Based on the record, we] conclude ... that McDaniel's actions resulted in the victim's death and that for purposes of Enmund ..., he did in fact kill. ) (emphasis added); Gillies I, 135 Ariz. at 515, 662 P.2d at 1022 (While Enmund apparently changes the current test in Arizona for imposing the death penalty upon the felony-murderer, i.e., the court must now find that the defendant either killed, attempted to kill or intended to kill the victim, we are satisfied that this requirement has been met. ) (emphasis added). Like the majority, I would hold that the trial judge's failure to make an Enmund finding is not error. See State v. Emery, 141 Ariz. 549, 553, 688 P.2d 175, 179 (1984) (Though the determination required by Enmund ... ought to be made by the trial court ..., we will not remand a case for resentencing whe[re] the record compels an affirmative finding that the defendant killed....).