Opinion ID: 1690126
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 27

Heading: did the trial court err by overruling jordan's motion to declare mississippi's capital punishment unconstitutional, or to let the jury consider all reasons offered by jordan as mitigators in support of a life sentence?

Text: ś 155. The trial court denied a pre-trial motion to declare the capital punishment scheme unconstitutional or to permit the jury to consider non-statutory mitigating factors in support of a lesser sentence than death. Jordan reasoned that the statutory list of mitigating factors was too restrictive because it required a finding of extreme emotional disturbance or duress or a finding that the criminal defendant's ability to comprehend the criminality of his actions was substantially impaired. Miss.Code Ann. § 99-19-101(6) (2000). ś 156. Regardless of any merit this claim may have, Jordan cannot prove any prejudice to him based on the statutory language and, therefore, his challenge to the unconstitutionality of the statute must fail. Jordan submitted as mitigating factors only those that are included in Jury Instruction No. 1, and none of those mitigators describe impairment of mental capacity or emotional duress or disturbance. Since the jury did not consider the possible unconstitutional mitigators, Jordan cannot raise this issue on appeal.