Opinion ID: 1057584
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Evidence Supporting Aggravating Factors

Text: In determining whether the evidence supports the jury's findings of statutory aggravating circumstances, an appellate court must determine, after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the State, whether a rational trier of fact could have found the existence of the aggravating circumstances beyond a reasonable doubt. State v. Rollins, 188 S.W.3d 553, 571 (Tenn.2006).
In sentencing Defendant to death for his first degree murder of Renee Jordan, the jury applied five aggravating factors. We will address in turn the sufficiency of the proof supporting each factor.
The jury determined that Defendant knowingly created a great risk of death to two (2) or more persons, other than the victim murdered, during the act of murder[ing] Mrs. Jordan. Tenn.Code Ann. § 39-13-204(i)(3). We have previously determined that this aggravating circumstance contemplates either multiple murders or threats to several persons at or shortly prior to or shortly after an act of murder upon which the prosecution is based. State v. Cone, 665 S.W.2d 87, 95 (Tenn.1984). The proof in this case established beyond a reasonable doubt that, in conjunction with murdering Mrs. Jordan, Defendant murdered two other persons and shot an additional two persons who were fortunate enough to survive. The proof is more than sufficient to support the jury's finding of this aggravating circumstance.