Opinion ID: 1702189
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: whether the verdict at resentencing was in proper form.

Text: ¶ 39. Berry claims that Miss.Code Ann. § 99-19-103 requires a jury to find the aggravating factors beyond a reasonable doubt, and that the verdict from resentencing was in violation because it failed to state such explicitly. [3] Because this issue was not raised in the direct appeal following resentencing, this issue is procedurally barred pursuant to Miss.Code Ann. § 99-39-21 (2000). ¶ 40. Procedural bar notwithstanding, our decision in Williams v. State, 684 So.2d 1179 (Miss.1996), is directly on point. Section 99-19-103 provides, in part: The statutory instructions as determined by the trial judge to be warranted by the evidence shall be given in the charge and in writing to the jury for its deliberation. The jury, if its verdict be a unanimous recommendation of death, shall designate in writing, signed by the foreman of the jury, the statutory aggravating circumstance or circumstances which it unanimously found beyond a reasonable doubt. (emphasis added). We held that, while the jury is required to find the existence of each aggravating circumstance beyond a reasonable doubt, there is no authority for the proposition that the jury must actually write the words `beyond a reasonable doubt' in its verdict. Williams, 684 So.2d at 1208. ¶ 41. This Court has held on numerous occasions that when a trial court instructs the jury, it is presumed the jurors follow the instructions of the court. Id. at 1209; see also Crenshaw v. State, 520 So.2d 131 (Miss.1988); McFee v. State, 511 So.2d 130 (Miss.1987); Johnson v. State, 475 So.2d 1136 (Miss.1985). ¶ 42. This issue is without merit.