Martin v. State, No. CR-99-2249 (AL 4/29/2005), CR-99-2249.

• Decision Date: 29 April 2005
• Docket Number: No. CR-99-2249.,CR-99-2249.
• Parties: George Martin v. State of Alabama.
• Court: Alabama Supreme Court

Page 1

George Martin v. State of Alabama.

No. CR-99-2249.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

Decided April 29, 2005.

Appeal from Mobile Circuit Court (CC-99-2696).

On Remand from the Alabama Supreme Court.

WISE, Judge.

George Martin was convicted of murder made capital because it was committed for pecuniary gain. See § 13A-5-40(a)(7), Ala. Code 1975. The jury, by a vote of 8-4, recommended that Martin be sentenced to life imprisonment without the possibility of parole. The trial court, however, overrode the jury's recommendation and sentenced Martin to death.

On May 30, 2003, this Court affirmed Martin's conviction and sentence. Martin v. State, [Ms. CR-99-2249, May 30, 2003] ___ So. 2d ___ (Ala.Crim.App. 2003). Martin petitioned the Alabama Supreme Court for certiorari review. That court granted the petition. On December 10, 2004, the Supreme Court affirmed Martin's conviction, but reversed the sentence of death, and remanded the case to this Court, holding that the trial court's written sentencing order failed "to allow the defendant the benefit of having the jury's recommendation of life imprisonment without parole treated as a mitigating factor as required by Ex parte Carroll[, 852 So. 2d 833 (Ala. 2002)]." Ex parte Martin, [Ms. 1022040, December 10, 2004] ___ So. 2d ___, ___ (Ala. 2004) (footnote omitted). The court noted:

"As we held in Carroll, the weight to be given the jury's recommendation of life imprisonment without parole as a mitigating circumstance should depend upon the number of jurors recommending that sentence and also upon the strength of the factual basis for such a recommendation in the form of information known to the jury, such as the conflicting evidence concerning Martin's alleged confession to his fellow inmate and the probable cross-contamination of Martin's clothing. As we noted in Carroll, `the jury's recommendation may be overridden based upon information known only to the trial court and not to the jury, when such information can properly be used to undermine a mitigating circumstance.' 852 So. 2d at 836."

___ So. 2d at ___.

In accordance with the Supreme Court's opinion in Ex parte Martin, the trial court's sentence of death is reversed, and this case is remanded for the trial court's entry of a new sentencing order that takes into consideration the Supreme Court's decision in Ex parte Carroll. The circuit court shall take all necessary action to see that the circuit court makes due return to this Court at...