Opinion ID: 4534441
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: statutory proportionality review

Text: ¶127. As a final matter, this Court must review the proportionality of Garcia’s death sentence. Miss. Code Ann. § 99-19-105 (Rev. 2015). ¶128. First, this Court must ask whether the sentence of death was imposed under the influence of passion, prejudice or any other arbitrary factor. Miss. Code Ann. § 99-19105(3)(a). We have already addressed in Section IV of this opinion Garcia’s argument that the trial judge should have recused as sentencer based on allegedly admitted improper influences on her sentencing decision. For the same reasons, we find Garcia’s sentence was not influenced by passion, prejudice, or any other arbitrary factor. 59 ¶129. Second, this Court must ask if the evidence support the judge’s finding of statutory aggravating circumstances. Miss. Code Ann. § 99-19-105(3)(b). The judge found two aggravating circumstances—(1) Garcia killed JT during the commission of a sexual battery and (2) JT’s murder was especially heinous, atrocious, and cruel. Miss. Code Ann. § 99-19101(5)(d); Miss. Code Ann. § 99-19-101(5)(i). The record supports both findings. Garcia admitted under oath that he sexually assaulted five-year-old JT by inserting his penis in her anus. He also told the court that he thought she had died while he was raping her but only later realized she was merely unconscious. While Garcia claimed that JT had already been bound by the socks when he arrived at the trailer, Garcia admitted he was the one who decided to hang JT by her neck from the bathroom window. He did this so he could rinse his semen off her. He then left her half-naked body hanging from that window. In addition to these facts, other evidence demonstrated the especially heinous, atrocious, and cruel nature of Garcia’s crime. In the days leading up to the crime, Garcia had conducted internet searches of the pornographic depiction of kidnaping and raping of young girls. If he was not the one who in fact kidnaped JT, he did admittedly rape her when presented with her small body, bound face down in a chair in a filthy trailer. An FBI agent later described it as the most disgusting crime scene he had ever worked. Dr. LeVaughn testified the sexual assault would have been painful and traumatic for the five-year-old JT. Dr. LeVaughn also opined that, based on the scratch marks on her neck, JT tried to free herself from the sock-based noose around her neck as she was strangled. So the evidence clearly supports the judge’s finding of both statutory aggravating circumstances. 60 ¶130. Finally, we must ask if the sentence of death is excessive or disproportionate to the penalty imposed in similar cases, considering both the crime and the defendant. Miss. Code Ann. § 99-19-105(3)(c).22 When faced with the capital murder of a young victim committed during the course of sexual battery, this Court has repeatedly and consistently held that the death penalty is not disproportionate. E.g., Loden v. State, 971 So. 2d 548, 571 (Miss. 2007) (holding the death penalty was not disproportionate for capital murder committed during the commission of kidnaping and sexual battery of a sixteen-year-old); Havard v. State, 928 So. 2d 771, 804 (Miss. 2006) (holding the death penalty was not disproportionate for capital murder committed during the commission of a sexual battery of a six-month-old infant); Evans v. State, 725 So. 2d 613, 708 (Miss. 1997) (holding the death penalty was not disproportionate for capital murder committed during the commission of sexual battery of a ten-year-old); Walker v. State, 671 So. 2d 581, 631 (Miss. 1995) (“find[ing] that a thorough consideration of Walker, his crime [of capital murder during the commission of sexual battery of teenager] and the sentence imposed in this case, as compared to . . . all other death penalty cases, indicates the death penalty is proportionate”).