Opinion ID: 1778569
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 7

Heading: whether the supreme court can reweigh remaining aggravating circumstances to determine whether the death sentence was proper?

Text: ¶ 74. Woodward further argues that, because two of the aggravating circumstances contained in the jury instructions were not supported by the evidence, the case must be reversed. That is, Woodward contends that this Court cannot reweigh the remaining aggravator against possible mitigators, and, therefore, the case must be reversed and remanded for a second resentencing hearing. ¶ 75. Woodward's argument is partially correct. There has been great division among the members of the Court on this subject. However, this Court has consistently held for years that, where an aggravating circumstance is improperly placed before the jury, there will be no reweighing of aggravating and mitigating circumstances at the appellate level. This is true, despite legislative enactments allowing appellate reweighing. King v. State, 656 So.2d 1168, 1173 (Miss. 1995) (considering 1994 amendments to Miss. Code Ann. § 99-19-105, which specifically allowed for appellate reweighing of aggravators and mitigators). [T]he right to a jury determination of the penalty of death is a substantial substantive right long held in this [S]tate. Id. ¶ 76. However, Woodward's argument assumes that the heinous, atrocious, or cruel aggravator and/or the avoiding lawful arrest aggravator were improperly given. This Court has already determined that the jury was properly instructed on these aggravating circumstances, therefore the issue of reweighing need not be considered.