Opinion ID: 2103748
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 14

Heading: Designation of Party with Burden of Proof in Weighing Process

Text: The defendant contends that Indiana Code Section 35-50-2-9(e) [5] is unclear as to whether the State must prove that the aggravating factor(s) outweigh the mitigating circumstance(s) or whether the defendant must prove the mitigating circumstance(s) outweigh the aggravating factor(s). Arguing that the statute can be easily interpreted to require the defendant to carry the burden of proof, the defendant asserts that the statute thereby shifts the burden of proof and violates the eighth and fourteenth amendments of the United States Constitution. The statute provides in relevant part: (e) If the hearing is by jury, the jury shall recommend to the court whether the death penalty should be imposed. The jury may recommend the death penalty only if it finds: (1) that the state has proved beyond a reasonable doubt that at least one (1) of the aggravating circumstances exists; and (2) that any mitigating circumstances that exist are outweighed by the aggravating circumstance or circumstances. The court shall make the final determination of the sentence, after considering the jury's recommendation, and the sentence shall be based on the same standards that the jury was required to consider. The court is not bound by the jury's recommendation. Ind. Code § 35-50-2-9(e). The determination of the weight to be accorded the aggravating and mitigating circumstances is not a fact which must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt but is a balancing process. Daniels v. State (1983), Ind., 453 N.E.2d 160, 171, vacated on other grounds, 491 U.S. 902, 109 S.Ct. 3182, 105 L.Ed.2d 691 (1989). The statute does not shift the factual burden of proof in violation of the eighth and fourteenth amendments.