Opinion ID: 2812008
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Instructions D-12, D-13, D-15, D-17, and D-18

Text: ¶79. Cox asserts that the denial of each of these instructions deprived the jury of sufficient instruction on their individual right and duty to decide Cox’s sentence and on the broad scope of their individual right to decide against a death sentence. Cox argues that, because the instruction given to the jury was merely a list of mitigating circumstances, the jury was not instructed on how each juror should assess the evidence in making an “individualized reasoned moral judgment.” Cox does not argue each instruction separately, offering instead a general argument. ¶80. Specifically, the trial court refused instruction D-12 per Watts v. State, 733 So. 2d 214 (Miss. 1999). Instruction D-13 was refused as a mercy instruction. Instruction D-15 was refused per Simmons v. State, 805 So. 2d 452 (Miss. 2001), and Mississippi Code Section 99-19-101. Instruction D-17 was dismissed as none of the parties could clearly interpret its meaning, and the trial court found that its content was covered by another instruction. Instruction D-18 also was refused as a mercy instruction pursuant to Goodin v. State, 787 So. 2d 639 (Miss. 2001). ¶81. The trial court gave an instruction listing seven mitigators and instructed the jurors that they were not bound by only those seven, for “you may find any fact or combination of facts to be mitigating.” The instruction further explained that if “you individually” find that 34 one or more of the mitigators exist, then “you” must consider whether those mitigators outweigh the aggravators. And, if “you” find that the mitigating circumstances outweigh the aggravating circumstances, then “you shall not impose” death. The aggravators were listed in the same fashion. Both were part of one instruction. We find no error in the trial court’s decision to refuse instructions D-12, 13, 15, 17, and 18, as the jurors were properly instructed by the instructions given.