Opinion ID: 1058506
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Use of Especially Aggravated Kidnapping to Enhance Punishment

Text: The defendant complains that the trial court permitted the prosecution to improperly suggest that the felony murder aggravator, which was based upon the underlying especially aggravated kidnapping, should be given extra weight against any mitigators. Specifically, the defendant cites to the state's argument, You've already come to this determination that there was, indeed, an especially aggravated kidnapping and that there was, indeed, a murder. The other one is the heinous, atrocious, and cruel. This argument is misplaced. The prosecution was merely reiterating to the jury that they had found during the guilt phase the elements of especially aggravated kidnapping, the underlying felony in the (i)(7) aggravator. The defendant also argues that the use of the same serious bodily injury to the victim to enhance kidnapping to especially aggravated kidnapping and to apply the (i)(7) aggravator was double counting, which violated double jeopardy. Initially, we note that the felony murder aggravator is triggered by a murder in perpetration of a kidnapping; it is not required to be an especially aggravated kidnapping. See Tenn.Code Ann. § 39-13-204(i)(7). Regardless, there is no double jeopardy violation. See State v. Stout, 46 S.W.3d 689, 706 (Tenn.), cert. denied, 534 U.S. 998, 122 S.Ct. 471, 151 L.Ed.2d 386 (2001).