Opinion ID: 1111189
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 11

Heading: the introduction of a series of photographs of the deceased was cumulative and the inflammatory impact of said photographs outweighed their probative value so as to violate appellant's rights under the eighth and fourteenth amendments to the united states constitution and sections 14 and 28 of the mississippi constitution, and said violation was compounded by the use of the photographs in closing argument and by the failure of sentencing instruction s-1 to define the aggravating circumstances.

Text: Pinkney challenges the introduction of the photographs at the guilt and sentence phase. Each of the photographs introduced into evidence had probative value. The photographs used during the guilt phase illustrated the cause of death, the circumstances surrounding the death, and the position of the body. The photographs used during the sentencing phase demonstrated that the victim had multiple lacerations and bruises. That the victim was bruised before she was killed demonstrates the cruelty of the crime. That she was struck in the head three times with a wood splitting maul demonstrates that the crime was atrocious. The nature of the crime was in issue during Pinkney's sentencing trial and the pictures, which were probative, were properly admitted. See Johnson, 476 So.2d 1195, 1206 (Miss. 1985), and Williams v. State (No. DP-56, decided October 7, 1987, not yet reported), Slip op. at 3-5. To the extent that Pinkney objects to the photographs on the basis of Stringer v. State, 500 So.2d 928, 934-35 (Miss. 1986), he is mistaken. The pictures in Stringer were used during closing argument and were from a separate and distinct crime. That is not the case here and this assignment of error is without merit.