Opinion ID: 2257779
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: The Torture or Depravity Aggravating Factor

Text: Defendant challenges the submission of the torture or depravity aggravating factor to the jury, arguing that it was not supported by sufficient evidence. See N.J.S.A. 3C:11-3c(4)(c) (The murder was outrageously or wantonly vile, horrible or inhuman in that it involved torture, depravity of mind, or an aggravated assault to the victim.). We disagree. Although the fact that Eck was stabbed twenty-four times by itself may not justify submission of this aggravating factor, see Erazo, supra, 126 N.J. at 138, 594 A. 2d 232, other evidence supported the conclusion that defendant inflict[ed] pain incremental to that attributable to the act of killing. Ibid. Specifically, the medical examiner testified that Eck had been stabbed in the genitals. Other testimony suggested that defendant inflicted these wounds for good measure. Cf. State v. Hunt, 115 N.J. 330, 389, 558 A. 2d 1259 (1989) ([M]ultiple stab wounds, when combined with other evidence of defendant's intent, could support the contention that defendant knew or intended that the victim would suffer....). We hold that defendant's intent to inflict pain additional to that of the murder itself can be inferred from the circumstances of this case. See Erazo, supra, 126 N.J. at 137, 594 A. 2d 232 (noting evidence of torture can be inferred from circumstances of the case); Ramseur, supra, 106 N.J. at 211 n. 38, 524 A. 2d 188 (noting that, in most cases, proof of torture or depravity factor will be totally circumstantial). Thus, it was not error for the court to submit this factor to the jury for consideration.