Opinion ID: 2116540
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 57

Heading: 5.6. Mitigating Circumstance (2)(g)

Text: Section 29-2523(2)(g), as amended by 1998 Neb. Laws, L.B. 422, provides that it is a mitigating circumstance when [a]t the time of the crime, the capacity of the defendant to appreciate the wrongfulness of his or her conduct or to conform his or her conduct to the requirements of the law was impaired as a result of mental illness, mental defect, or intoxication. Dr. Jeffrey testified that Lotter's capacity to appreciate the wrongfulness of his conduct or to conform his conduct to the requirements of the law was impaired as a result of mental illness, mental defect, or intoxication. The State did not dispute this statement. Dr. Fine testified that Lotter has several mental disorders that have been ongoing since birth, that Lotter had those disorders at the time the crimes were committed, and that Lotter would continue to have those disorders. Dr. Fine described Lotter as extremely dysfunctional and stated that Lotter's mental disorders impaired his ability to appreciate the wrongfulness of his conduct or to conform his conduct to the requirements of the law. Lotter argues that the weight given to this circumstance was erroneously diminished based on the sentencing panel's reference to its findings regarding § 29-2523(2)(b), (c), and (d) and the panel's finding that Lotter was not intoxicated. We conclude that even were Lotter intoxicated, any additional weight Lotter's intoxication would have is insufficient to approach or exceed the weight of the aggravating circumstances in the instant case. Thus, this assignment of error is without merit.