Court Opinion

ID: 9771328
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-29 16:39:17.619392+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:31:28.610240
License: Public Domain

BLACKMAR, Judge,
concurring in part and dissenting in part.
I agree that the conviction should be affirmed. Section 565.035 provides in pertinent part as follows:
[[Image here]]
*8912. The supreme court of Missouri shall consider the punishment as well as any errors enumerated by way of appeal.
3. With regard to the sentence, the supreme court shall determine:
[[Image here]]
(3) Whether the sentence of death is excessive or disproportionate to the penalty imposed in similar cases, considering both the crime, the strength of the evidence and the defendant. (Emphasis supplied).
[[Image here]]
The record shows that the defendant has lived his life from a very young age in some form of custody in a Missouri institution. He has been unable to adapt to any environment in which he finds himself. The easiest course of action might be to execute him as a means of extermination or euthanasia, but there should be a limit to the process of burying our mistakes. The state must bear some responsibility for the situation which has developed. I would exercise our statutory authority by mitigating the death sentence to life imprisonment.