SMITH

v.

CALIFORNIA

Citator

Cited By

• Johnston v. State, 863 So. 2d 271 (Fla. 2003)
  …hat the sentence is proportional. Rimmer v. State, 825 So. 2d 304, 331 (Fla.) (“Although appellant does not argue the proportionality of the death sentence in this case, this Court must nevertheless conduct a proportionality review.”), cert. denied, 537 U.S. 1034, 123 S.Ct. 567, 154 L.Ed.2d 453 (2002). This review “is not a comparison between the number of aggravating and mitigating circumstances; rather, it is a thoughtful, deliberate proportionality review to consider the totality of the circumstances in a…
• Fitzpatrick v. State, 900 So. 2d 495 (Fla. 2005)
  …ed by the trial judge. PROPORTIONALITY Although Fitzpatrick does not challenge the proportionality of his death sentence, this Court must nevertheless conduct a proportionality review. See Rimmer v. State, 825 So. 2d 304, 331 (Fla.), cert. denied, 537 U.S. 1034, 123 S.Ct. 567, 154 L.Ed.2d 453 (2002). In conducting its proportionality review, this Court must compare the totality of the circumstances in a particular case with other capital casés to determine whether death is warranted in the case under revie…
• Hutchinson v. State, 882 So. 2d 943 (Fla. 2004)
  …2068, 158 L.Ed.2d 622 (2004); Rimmer v. State, 825 So. 2d 304, 328 (Fla.2002) (finding that evidence did not support HAC where the record did not reveal that the defendant tortured the victims or subjected them to pain and suffering), cert. denied, 537 U.S. 1034, 123 S.Ct. 567, 154 L.Ed.2d 453 (2002); Ferrell v. State, 686 So. 2d 1324, 1330 (Fla.1996) (“Execution-style killings are not generally HAC unless the state has presented other evidence to show some physical or mental torture of the victim.”); Robin…