Opinion ID: 1678586
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Especially cruel or depraved manner

Text: Applying the substantial evidence standard, I cannot agree with the majority's decision to affirm Mr. Willett's death sentence based upon the especially cruel or depraved manner aggravating circumstance set forth in Ark.Code Ann. § 5-4-604(8)(Repl.1997). In my view, there is insufficient evidence to support the jury's finding that this aggravating circumstance existed beyond a reasonable doubt. According to § 5-4-604(8)(A), a defendant who commits a capital murder in an especially cruel or depraved manner may be subject to the death penalty. In the case at bar, the jury was instructed on the entire statute, but the State does not argue, and the majority opinion does not suggest, that Mr. Willett murdered his son and brother in an especially depraved manner. Indeed, the record contains absolutely no evidence suggesting that the murders fall within that provision. The question is whether these victims were murdered in an especially cruel manner. Section 5-4-604(8)(B) provides that a capital murder is committed in an especially cruel manner when as part of a course of conduct intended to inflict mental anguish, serious physical abuse, or torture upon the victim prior to the victim's death, mental anguish, serious physical abuse, or torture is inflicted. Mental anguish is defined as the victim's uncertainty as to his ultimate fate. Serious physical abuse is defined as physical abuse that creates a substantial risk of death or that causes protracted impairment of health, or loss or protracted impairment of the function of any bodily member or organ. Torture is defined as the infliction of extreme physical pain for a prolonged period of time prior to the victim's death. [Emphasis supplied.] As there is neither argument from the State, nor any suggestion from the majority, nor any evidence in the record that Mr. Willett tortured his victims within the meaning of the above statute, the precise issue is whether this case falls within the mental anguish or serious physical abuse provisions. According to the majority, there is substantial evidence (1) that Mr. Willett intended to inflict mental anguish on his son Eric prior to his death and that Eric actually suffered mental anguish; and (2) that Mr. Willett intended to inflict serious physical abuse on his brother Roger prior to his death and that Roger actually suffered such abuse before he died. Even if it could be conceded that Eric was uncertain as to his ultimate fate in the last moments of his life and that Roger suffered serious physical abuse before he died, there is absolutely no evidence to show that Mr. Willett intended to inflict such forms of cruelty on his two victims. The record leaves no doubt that Mr. Willett murdered his son and brother, and attempted to kill himself and his other children, because he feared that the Department of Human Services, which had been investigating his family, was engaged in a conspiracy to take away custody of Mr. Willett's children and brother. Mr. Willett's statement, which was controverted by none of the State's evidence, as well as all of his actions, established that Mr. Willett's intention was to commit the murders quickly, without causing his victims to suffer, so that he and his family could all go to the Lord. The State had the burden of presenting substantial evidence in support of the aggravating circumstance it alleged, Greene v. State, supra , and that burden was not met. There is no evidence that Mr. Willett bore any animosity toward the victims, much less any evidence that he intended to treat them in an especially cruel manner. On account of this insufficiency in the evidence, Mr. Willett's sentence of death should be reversed and the case remanded for a resentencing procedure. I respectfully dissent. IMBER, J., joins in part one of this opinion.