Opinion ID: 1948017
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 7

Heading: The Verdict Slip

Text: Appellant's last claim is that the court erred in refusing his request that each juror be directed to fill out a separate penalty verdict slip in addition to the official master verdict slip. This claim is meritless. Neither the holding in Mills nor any other case requires separate verdict slips. The sentencing court properly instructed the jury in accordance with Mills. That is all that is required. Finally, we have thoroughly reviewed the record and conclude that the evidence supports the findings of aggravating circumstances made by the jury. We have also conducted the proportionality review required by 42 Pa.Cons.Stat.Ann. § 9711(h)(3)(iii) and find no basis to conclude that the penalty imposed is excessive or disproportionate to the sentence imposed in similar cases. See Commonwealth v. Frey, 504 Pa. 428, 443, 475 A.2d 700, 707-08 (1984). Likewise, the record does not provide any grounds for us to find that the sentences of death were the product of passion, prejudice or any other arbitrary factor. See 42 Pa.Cons.Stat.Ann. § 9711(h)(3)(i). Since the sentences of death in this case comply with the concerns in the statute, the sentences must be affirmed. Judgments of sentence affirmed. [10] LARSEN, J., did not participate in the decision of this case. CAPPY, J., files a concurring and dissenting opinion.