Opinion ID: 1817377
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 7

Heading: requested jury instruction # 10

Text: At the sentencing trial, the defendant requested that the court give his proposed jury instruction # 10, listing the nonstatutory mitigating circumstances that he felt were supported by the evidence at trial: First, that [petitioner] had psychological and emotional problems when he committed the capital offense; Second, that [petitioner's] early family history contributed to his conduct; Third, that [petitioner] has made efforts to assist law enforcement; Fourth, that [petitioner] has made efforts to help the victim's family; and Fifth, that [petitioner] has made a good adjustment to life in prison. The trial judge gave the following instructions to the jury regarding nonstatutory mitigating circumstances: In addition to the mitigating circumstances I have just read to you, you may also consider as a mitigating circumstance the circumstances of the capital offense which tend to indicate that the Defendant should not be sentenced to death. This includes, but is not intended [sic] to, anything that happened to the Defendant before he committed the capital offense that indicates or tends to indicate that he should not be sentenced to death. Mitigating circumstances also include, but are not limited to, any conduct or behavior of the Defendant since the time of the capital offense which indicates or tends to indicate that he should not be sentenced to death. Mitigating circumstances also include, but are not limited to, any aspect of the Defendant's mental or emotional condition at the time of the crime which indicates or tends to indicate that the Defendant should be sentenced to life imprisonment without parole instead of death. A mitigating circumstance does not have to be included in the list which I have read to you in order for it to be considered by you. .... The law of this State recognizes that it is possible, in at least some situations, for a large number of aggravating circumstances to be outweighed by one or a few mitigating circumstances. In other words, the law contemplates that different circumstances may be given different weights or values in determining what sentence is to be given to a particular circumstance in light of all the other circumstances in this case. You must do that in the process of weighing the aggravating circumstance or circumstances against the mitigating circumstance or circumstances in order to determine the proper sentence. The Eleventh United States Circuit Court of Appeals requires that the trial judge do the following when instructing the jury on mitigating circumstances in a death penalty case: (1) instruct the jury that it must consider mitigating evidence, (2) define mitigating factors and explain their function in sentencing deliberations, and (3) inform the jurors that a finding of aggravating circumstances does not require them to return a death sentence. Tucker v. Zant, 724 F.2d 882, 891 (11th Cir.1984). The trial court's instructions satisfied the requirements of Tucker. Therefore, we find that the trial court did not commit error by denying the defendant's requested jury instruction # 10.