Opinion ID: 1723757
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 14

Heading: trial counsel failed to object to the submission of the pecuniary gain aggravating circumstance or the lack of an instruction defining capital murder for pecuniary gain at trial and on appeal.

Text: ¶ 62. Ricky Chase raised the following issues during his direct appeal on the merits: The trial court erred in allowing the jury to consider the pecuniary gain aggravating circumstance. The submission of the robbery aggravating circumstance at the sentencing phase of Ricky Chase's trial violated the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution of the United States and Article 3 § 28 of the Constitution of 1890. ¶ 63. This Court noted that Chase failed to object to these aggravating factors at trial and did not raise the issue(s) in his post-trial motions. The Court added: Chase conveniently omitted reference to the prospective nature of the decision [ Willie v. State, 585 So.2d 660 (Miss. 1991)]. Willie was decided on July 24, 1991 after the trial in this cause concluded in February 28, 1990. In Jenkins v. State, 607 So.2d 1171, 1182-83 (Miss. 1992), this Court reaffirmed its holding in Willie. Jenkins' conviction and sentence were both reversed on other grounds, and any suggestion that Jenkins changed Willie is erroneous. The prohibition of Willie still applies prospectively to those cases tried after that case was decided. ... . In the present case, the right Chase asserts is the right not to have the two aggravators given to the jury. There is no need to relax the procedural bar and the bar independently is basis for rejecting this assignment. Chase, 645 So.2d at 859. ¶ 64. In Willie, 585 So.2d at 680-81 (citations omitted), this Court found, as to the robbery aggravator and the pecuniary gain aggravator, [n]ot only should the two aggravators not be given as separate and independent aggravators when they essentially comprise one, they may not be given. When life is at stake, a jury cannot be allowed the opportunity to doubly weigh the commission of the underlying felony and the motive behind underlying felony as separate aggravators... . This decision is to be prospective and will take effect from this date forward. ¶ 65. Chase now argues that trial counsel was ineffective for failure to object to the submission of the pecuniary gain aggravator. As Willie had not yet been decided when Chase's trial took place, we find that his counsel could not be found to be ineffective for failure to anticipate this change in the law.