Taylor v. State
| Decision Date | 21 October 1994 |
| Docket Number | CR 92-1313. |
| Citation | 666 So.2d 71 |
| Parties | Michael Shannon TAYLOR, alias v. STATE. |
| Court | Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals |
Charles C. Hart, Gadsden, Bryan Stevenson and Ellen R. Finn, Montgomery, and Mac Downs, Gadsden (withdrew March 22, 1994), for appellant.
James H. Evans, Atty. Gen., and Tracy Daniel, Deputy Atty. Gen., for appellee.
ON RETURN TO REMAND
This Court remanded this cause to the trial court Taylor v. State, 666 So.2d 36 (Ala.Cr.App.1994) (emphasis in original). The trial court has conscientiously complied with those directions and has submitted a sentencing order satisfying the statutory requirements.
Pursuant to Rule 45A, A.R.App.P., we have searched the entire proceedings under review and found no plain error or defect that has or probably has adversely affected any substantial right of the appellant. We have also reviewed the propriety of the sentence of death as required by Ala.Code 1975, § 13A-5-53(a). It is the finding of this Court that there is no error in the sentencing proceedings adversely affecting the rights of the appellant.
The trial court found the existence of two aggravating circumstances: that the capital offense was committed during the commission of robbery in the first degree, § 13A-5-49(4); and that the capital offense was especially heinous, atrocious, or cruel compared to other capital offenses, § 13A-5-49(8).
The trial court found the existence of two statutory mitigating circumstances: that the appellant has no significant history of prior criminal activity, § 13A-5-51(1) and the age (19 years) of the appellant at the time of the offense, § 13A-5-51(7). The trial court also found the existence of the following nonstatutory mitigating circumstances:
It is the finding of this Court that the trial court's findings concerning the aggravating and mitigating circumstances are supported by the record.1
It is the finding of this Court that death is the proper sentence in this case. There is no indication that the sentence of death was...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Petersen v. State
...the penalty phase is a recommendation or an advisory verdict. Taylor v. State, 666 So. 2d 36 (Ala. Cr. App. 1994), on remand, 666 So. 2d 71 (Ala. Cr. App. 1994), aff'd, 666 So. 2d 73 (Ala. 1995), cert. denied, 516 U.S. 1120, 116 S. Ct. 928, 133 L.Ed. 2d 856 (1996) ; Burton v. State, 651 So.......
-
Reynolds v. State Of Ala.
...940 So. 2d 331, 352 (Ala. Crim. App. 2005) (citing Taylor v. State, 666 So. 2d 36, 70 (Ala. Crim. App.), on return to remand, 666 So. 2d 71 (Ala. Crim. App. 1994), aff'd, 666 So. 2d 73 (Ala. 1995), cert, denied, 516 U.S. 1120 (1996)). No plain error occurred, and no basis for reversal exist......
-
McGowan v. State
.... . "In Taylor v. State, [666 So.2d 36 (Ala.Crim.App.), rem'd. on other grounds, opinion extended and aff'd on return to remand, 666 So.2d 71 (Ala.Cr. App.1994), aff'd, 666 So.2d 73 (Ala. 1995)], we "`The appellant objects for the first time on appeal to the argument of the district attorne......
-
Samra v. State
...are being punished by death throughout this state. Taylor v. State, 666 So.2d 36 (Ala.Cr.App.), opinion extended after remand, 666 So.2d 71 (Ala.Cr.App.1994), aff'd, 666 So.2d 73 (Ala.1995), cert. denied, 516 U.S. 1120, 116 S.Ct. 928, 133 L.Ed.2d 856 (1996); Holladay v. State, 549 So.2d 122......