Opinion ID: 1191763
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Witness Elimination

Text: The trial court found that the murders were heinous and depraved in part because they were committed for purposes of witness elimination. This finding was made without benefit of this court's later opinion clarifying and narrowing the witness elimination factor in State v. Ross, 180 Ariz. 598, 606, 886 P.2d 1354, 1362 (1994), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 116 S.Ct. 210, 133 L.Ed.2d 142 (1995). Under Ross, the witness elimination factor may only be found where: (1) the murder victim is a witness to some other crime and is killed to prevent that person from testifying about the other crime; (2) the defendant states that witness elimination is a motive for the murder; or (3) where extraordinary circumstances of the crime show, beyond a reasonable doubt, that witness elimination is a motive. This will only occur in the most extreme case. The first two factors are clearly not present here, but the state argues that this is the type of case in which the third Ross factor is present. That factor, however, requires a very high level of proof found only in the most extreme cases. This case does not meet the test. Woods' testimony, at least in part, indicates that the murders were part of a botched robbery that went bad when one of the victims rebelled. Based upon this record, it cannot be said beyond a reasonable doubt that the murders represent the extreme case of a calculated decision to kill in order to eliminate witnesses.