Opinion ID: 3043524
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Imposition of a Death Sentence

Text: After considering the evidence and arguments, the state trial judge found that the aggravating circumstances outweighed the mitigating circumstances in this case, accepted the jury’s advisory death sentence, and ordered that Smith be put to death by electrocution.9 The state trial court found these three aggravating circumstances: (1) Smith committed the capital offense while under a sentence of imprisonment at the time of the offense, Ala. Code § 13A-5-49(1); (2) Smith committed the murder while engaged in the commission of a robbery, id. § 13A-5-49(4); and (3) the capital offense was especially heinous, atrocious, or cruel compared to other capital offenses, id. § 13A-5-49(8). 9 In 2002, the Alabama Legislature changed the State’s standard method of execution from electrocution to lethal injection. See Ala. Code § 15-18-82.1 (2006 Cumulative Supp.). Those inmates who were sentenced to death and whose certificates of judgment were issued after July 1, 2002, had a time-limited option to elect electrocution instead of death by lethal injection. Id. § 15-18-82.1(b). At oral argument, it was confirmed that Smith did not so choose. 16 Case: 14-10721 Date Filed: 08/03/2015 Page: 17 of 39 The state trial court found that no statutory or non-statutory mitigating circumstances existed. Specifically, the trial court found (1) the capital offense was not committed while Smith was under the influence of extreme mental or emotional disturbance and (2) Smith “was not mentally or emotionally disturbed” to an “extreme extent” or “to the extent that this mitigating circumstance exists.” See id. § 13A-5-51(2). The trial court reached this conclusion after “carefully review[ing] and weigh[ing] both the report and testimony of Doctor James Chudy, a clinical psychologist, in the context of the facts underlying the offense charged and proven.”