Opinion ID: 2639377
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: Finding probable cause for aggravating circumstances

Text: Floyd argues that before the State can allege aggravating circumstances and seek the death penalty, a grand jury or a justice court must first find probable cause for the circumstances. He cites the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution and Article 1, Section 8, of the Nevada Constitution, which require indictment by a grand jury or the filing of an information before a person can be tried for a capital or other infamous crime. [11] Floyd's argument has no merit. The United States Supreme Court has stated: Aggravating circumstances are not separate penalties or offenses, but are `standards to guide the making of [the] choice' between the alternative verdicts of death and life imprisonment. [12] Therefore, an aggravating circumstance alleged in a capital proceeding does not constitute a separate crime that requires a finding of probable cause under the U.S. or Nevada constitutions. Floyd also relies on the Supreme Court's holding in Jones v. United States that under the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment and the notice and jury trial guarantees of the Sixth Amendment, any fact (other than prior conviction) that increases the maximum penalty for a crime must be charged in an indictment, submitted to a jury, and proven beyond a reasonable doubt. [13] Jones does not support Floyd's proposition either. The Court emphasized that its holding in Jones did not apply to aggravating circumstances because the finding of aggravating facts falling within the traditional scope of capital sentencing [is] a choice between a greater and lesser penalty, not . . . a process of raising the ceiling of the sentencing range available. [14] We conclude that a probable cause finding is not necessary for the State to allege aggravating circumstances and seek a death sentence.