Opinion ID: 1936097
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 26

Heading: whether the sentencing verdict form was designed to encourage jurors to neglect adequate consideration of sentencing options other than death

Text: Jackson next contends that the form of the sentencing verdict was such that jurors were led to overlook sentencing options other than death. Jackson raised no objection to the instruction at trial and thus has waived his right to challenge it on appeal. Conner v. State, 632 So.2d 1239, 1273 (Miss. 1993) (failure to object at trial to form of verdict waived right to complain on appeal). However, we note that for each count of capital murder, space for the foreman's signature was provided only for the first sentencing option, the death penalty, and not for the second option, life imprisonment. In a similarly-structured instruction in Jenkins v. State, 607 So.2d 1171, 1180 (Miss. 1992), however, we found fault with the instruction, stating: We are concerned that the instruction as written and printed could cause the jury to neglect Options Two and Three. Upon retrial, we suggest that the trial court revise this instruction to more clearly instruct the jury. Id. Although Jackson's claim is procedurally barred, we again urge the trial courts to exercise more caution in the issuance of such instructions.