Opinion ID: 1598918
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 20

Heading: must the court remand this case for a new sentencing proceeding, in light of prosecution's mentioning of undefined aggravators which were vigorously argued to the jury as the grounds for a death sentence?

Text: ¶ 132. Finally, Burns contends that the trial court committed reversible error when the prosecutor was allowed to use undefined aggravators such as especially heinous and cruel. The State correctly points out that the only aggravating factor the jury was instructed on was whether or not the murder occurred during the commission of a robbery. ¶ 133. While the prosecutor never used the word heinous or especially heinous or atrocious, the following are comments by the prosecution to which the appellant refers. [MR. YOUNG:] ... I want you to think about something that Rowland Geddie said. Think about the pain and suffering that Mike McBride went through. When he was yelling, why are you doing this to me, and being stabbed in the head, the neck, the back, the mouth, stabbed so many times that he died of blunt trauma and from bleeding to death. [MR. YOUNG:] ... The one aggravating circumstance that you only need to consider in this case is the fact that it was committed during the course of a robbery. ¶ 134. The prosecutor did nothing more than refer to the facts of this case. The autopsy report, as discussed before, stated that McBride died from blunt force injuries to the head and neck. This Court recognizes that murders are never kind or gentle. The record before us supports the prosecutor's argument. The prosecutor was simply doing his job in attempting to elicit a death penalty conviction from the jury. This Court has said that counsel may not, under the guise of argument, state facts that have not been proved by the evidence. Wells v. State, 698 So.2d 497, 506 (Miss.1997) ( citing Pierce v. State, 289 So.2d 901, 903 (Miss. 1974)). Such was not the case here. A thorough review of the record reveals that all of the prosecutor's comments were supported by the record. ¶ 135. Unfortunately, this case is not the first case this Court has been asked to review wherein a defendant, after either stabbing and/or beating the victim to death, was charged with capital murder while in the commission of armed robbery and was sentenced to death. See Wilcher v. State, 697 So.2d 1087 (Miss.1997); Wilcher v. State, 697 So.2d 1123 (Miss.1997); Mack v. State, 650 So.2d 1289 (Miss.1994); Blue v. State, 674 So.2d 1184 (Miss.1996); Conner v. State, 632 So.2d 1239 (Miss.1993). This Court can find no difference in the present case and these previously decided cases to warrant a finding that the sentence was disproportionate to the crime committed. ¶ 136. Twelve very able people determined after hearing the facts and arguments, observing the witnesses' demeanor, and viewing exhibits that Burns would pay with his life for the crime he committed. While the standard of review is heightened in death penalty cases, we find that the jury verdict and sentence was appropriate according to the law of our State. Thus, this issue is without merit.