Download Zipped Enrolled WP 6.1 HB0048.ZIP 8,787 Bytes
[Introduced][Amended][Status][Bill Documents][Fiscal Note][Bills Directory]

H.B. 48 Enrolled

    

AMENDMENTS TO CAPITAL SENTENCING

    
1997 GENERAL SESSION

    
STATE OF UTAH

    
Sponsor: David Ure

    AN ACT RELATING TO THE CRIMINAL CODE; AMENDING THE PROCEDURES FOR
    CAPITAL SENTENCING; CREATING NEW STANDARDS FOR THE IMPOSITION
    OF THE DEATH PENALTY AND LIFE IN PRISON WITHOUT THE POSSIBILITY
    OF PAROLE; AND PROVIDING THAT IN JURY PROCEEDINGS TEN OR MORE
    JURORS MUST AGREE TO IMPOSE A PUNISHMENT OF LIFE IN PRISON
    WITHOUT THE POSSIBILITY OF PAROLE.
    This act affects sections of Utah Code Annotated 1953 as follows:
    AMENDS:
         76-3-207, as last amended by Chapter 352, Laws of Utah 1995
    Be it enacted by the Legislature of the state of Utah:
        Section 1. Section 76-3-207 is amended to read:
         76-3-207. Capital felony -- Sentencing proceeding.
        (1) When a defendant has pled guilty to or been found guilty of a capital felony, there shall
    be further proceedings before the court or jury on the issue of sentence. In the case of a plea of
    guilty to a capital felony, the sentencing proceedings shall be conducted by the court which
    accepted the plea or by a jury upon request of the defendant. When a defendant has been found
    guilty of a capital felony, the proceedings shall be conducted before the court or jury which found
    the defendant guilty, provided the defendant may waive hearing before the jury, in which event
    the hearing shall be before the court. If, however, circumstances make it impossible or impractical
    to reconvene the same jury for the sentencing proceedings, the court may dismiss that jury and
    convene a new jury for such proceedings. If a retrial of the sentencing proceedings is necessary
    as a consequence of a remand from an appellate court, the sentencing authority shall be determined
    as provided in Subsection (4).
        (2) (a) In capital sentencing proceedings, evidence may be presented on:
        (i) the nature and circumstances of the crime;


        (ii) the defendant's character, background, history, mental and physical condition;
        (iii) the victim and the impact of the crime on the victim's family and community without
    comparison to other persons or victims; and
        (iv) any other facts in aggravation or mitigation of the penalty that the court considers
    relevant to the sentence.
        (b) Any evidence the court considers to have probative force may be received regardless of
    its admissibility under the exclusionary rules of evidence. The state's attorney and the defendant
    shall be permitted to present argument for or against the sentence of death.
        (3) Aggravating circumstances shall include those outlined in Section 76-5-202. Mitigating
    circumstances shall include:
        (a) the defendant has no significant history of prior criminal activity;
        (b) the homicide was committed while the defendant was under the influence of [extreme]
    mental or emotional disturbance;
        (c) the defendant acted under [extreme] duress or under the [substantial] domination of
    another person;
        (d) at the time of the homicide, the capacity of the defendant to appreciate the wrongfulness
    of his conduct or to conform his conduct to the requirement of law was [substantially] impaired as
    a result of mental disease, intoxication, or influence of drugs;
        (e) the youth of the defendant at the time of the crime;
        (f) the defendant was an accomplice in the homicide committed by another person and [his]
    the defendant's participation was relatively minor; and
        (g) any other fact in mitigation of the penalty.
        (4) The court or jury, as the case may be, shall retire to consider the penalty. [In] Except as
    provided in Subsection 76-3-207.5(2), in all proceedings before a jury, under this section, it shall be
    instructed as to the punishment to be imposed upon a unanimous [verdict] decision for death and that
    the penalty of either life in prison or [with regard to sentences to be imposed on or after April 27,
    1992,] life in prison without parole, shall be imposed if a unanimous [verdict] decision for death is
    not found. The death penalty shall only be imposed if, after considering the totality of the

- 2 -


    aggravating and mitigating circumstances, the jury is persuaded beyond a reasonable doubt that total
    aggravation outweighs total mitigation, and is further persuaded, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the
    imposition of the death penalty is justified and appropriate in the circumstances. If the jury reports
    unanimous agreement to impose the sentence of death, the court shall discharge the jury and shall
    impose the sentence of death. If the jury is unable to reach a unanimous [verdict] decision imposing
    the sentence of death, [with regard to sentences to be imposed on or after April 27, 1992, the court
    shall instruct] except as provided in Subsection 76-3-207.5(2), the jury [to] shall then determine [by
    a unanimous vote] whether the penalty of life in prison without parole shall be imposed. The penalty
    of life in prison without parole shall only be imposed if the jury determines that the sentence of life
    in prison without parole is appropriate. If the jury reports agreement by ten jurors or more to impose
    the sentence of life in prison without parole, the court shall discharge the jury and shall impose the
    sentence of life in prison without parole. If [the jury is unable to reach a verdict] ten jurors or more
    do not agree upon a sentence of life in prison without parole, the court shall discharge the jury and
    impose the sentence of life imprisonment with the possibility of parole. If the defendant waives
    hearing before the jury as to sentencing, the court shall determine the appropriate penalty according
    to the standards of this subsection.
        (5) Upon any appeal by the defendant where the sentence is of death, the appellate court, if
    it finds prejudicial error in the sentencing proceeding only, may set aside the sentence of death and
    remand the case to the trial court for new sentencing proceedings to the extent necessary to correct
    the error or errors. No error in the sentencing proceedings shall result in the reversal of the
    conviction of a capital felony. In cases of remand for new sentencing proceedings, all exhibits and
    a transcript of all testimony and other evidence properly admitted in the prior trial and sentencing
    proceedings shall be admissible in the new sentencing proceedings, and if the sentencing proceeding
    was before a:
        (a) jury, a new jury shall be impaneled for the new sentencing proceeding;
        (b) judge, the original trial judge shall conduct the new sentencing proceeding; or
        (c) judge, and the original trial judge is unable or unavailable to conduct a new sentencing
    proceeding, then another judge shall be designated to conduct the new sentencing proceeding.

- 3 -


        (6) In the event the death penalty is held to be unconstitutional by the Utah Supreme Court
    or the United States Supreme Court, the court having jurisdiction over a person previously sentenced
    to death for a capital felony shall cause [such] the person to be brought before the court, and the
    court shall sentence the person to life in prison, if the death penalty is held unconstitutional prior to
    April 27, 1992, or life in prison without parole if the death penalty is held unconstitutional on or after
    April 27, 1992, and any person who is thereafter convicted of a capital felony shall be sentenced to
    life in prison or life in prison without parole.

- 4 -


[Bill Documents][Bills Directory]