Opinion ID: 2457072
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: Guilt Phase Instruction on Range of Sentence for Attempted Rape

Text: Since Mr. Knese was not a prior, persistent or dangerous offender, he had a right to demand the jury sentence him for the attempted rape conviction. [22] The jury decided this sentence after returning its guilty verdicts in the first phase of the trial, but before hearing evidence in the death penalty phase. Mr. Knese claims that the trial court erred in failing to instruct the jury as to the range of punishment at the close of the guilt phase. Section 565.030 outlines the procedure for sentencing in cases involving a charge of first degree murder and prohibits sentencing issues from being considered by the trier of fact during the guilt phase: Where murder in the first degree is submitted... without a waiver of the death penalty, the trial shall proceed in two stages ... At the first stage the trier shall decide only whether the defendant is guilty or not guilty of any submitted offense. The issue of punishment shall not be submitted to the trier at the first stage. [23] While the statute is not unambiguous as to precisely when a jury is to impose sentence for lesser crimes tried together with a capital charge, it is absolutely clear that a the jury is not to be instructed on this matter, as Mr. Knese argues, before it has returned its verdicts as to the guilt of the accused. The trial court did not err in omitting the range of punishment issue from the jury instructions at the close of the guilt phase.