Opinion ID: 1781968
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: the state's central sentencing instruction and state's instruction allowing sentencer to consider evidence presented during the guilt phase are incorrect statements of law and violate the eighth and fourteenth amendment of the united states constitution.

Text: The appellant next complains about sentencing Instructions SSP-2 and SSP-4, and additionally contends the argument of the State during the sentencing phase went beyond its proper scope. Foster failed to state timely objections to either of these instructions or to the State's arguments at the sentencing. These points are raised for the first time before this Court and are therefore procedurally barred. Moawad v. State, 531 So.2d 632 (Miss. 1988). Were we to address this assignment, however, we would find it to be without merit. Foster's chief complaint about Instruction SSP-2 is that, in allowing evidence from the guilt phase to be reintroduced, the instruction improperly allowed the jury to consider aggravators other than those allowed under Miss. Code Ann. § 99-19-101(5). Our sentencing procedure requires the jury to determine that any aggravating circumstances it finds are not outweighed by any mitigating factors. An orderly and coherent procedure in the sentencing phase requires proof of the manner in which the homicide was committed. Facts relevant to an aggravating circumstance are competent. Evans v. State, 422 So.2d 737, 742 (Miss. 1982). As for Instruction SSP-4, Foster requested an instruction for all intents and purposes identical to one that the State was granted. It is a familiar rule of law that one may not complain of his own instruction. Hall v. State, 420 So.2d 1381, 1386 (Miss. 1982). Accord Buford v. State, 372 So.2d 254, 256 (Miss. 1979). Accordingly, Foster has no valid complaint about Instruction SSP-4. In addition to failing to point out any error to the lower court in the arguments by the State during the sentencing phase, Foster has not persuasively shown to this Court that the argument was improper. This assignment of error is procedurally barred and also completely without merit.