Opinion ID: 1279670
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 27

Heading: conclusion

Text: The jury in this case has been allowed to make an egregious error. My review of the record leads me to the inescapable conclusion that the jury found Jeffries guilty of aggravated murder based on impermissible factors, factors other than those set out in the death penalty statute. The evidence presented by the State is insufficient to prove the existence of any aggravating factor; this alone requires reversal of the aggravated murder convictions. In addition, the erroneous instructions on the aggravating factors are sufficiently prejudicial in and of themselves to require reversal of those convictions. Furthermore, these prejudicial instructions have greatly impeded our review of the sufficiency of the evidence. The function of appellate review is to correct the errors of the lower courts. Meaningful appellate review is vital to avoid the arbitrary and capricious imposition of death. See Gregg v. Georgia, 428 U.S. 153, 49 L.Ed.2d 859, 96 S.Ct. 2909 (1976). An appellate review of a death sentence must never deteriorate into a mechanistic rubber-stamping process, glossing over errors committed below. The perfunctory review in which the majority engages has deprived Jeffries of a safeguard which is indispensable to a constitutional death penalty scheme: meaningful appellate review. For these reasons, I dissent. DOLLIVER, C.J., and UTTER and BRACHTENBACH, JJ., concur with PEARSON, J.