Cases | Wooten v. State, 931 S.W.2d 408 (Ark. 1996) | 2018
The defendant was convicted of capital murder, criminal attempt to commit capital murder, and aggravated assault. He appealed, arguing, among other things, that the trial court erred in allowing the State to use victim impact evidence in the State’s initial presentation during the penalty phase of his trial, rather than as rebuttal to any mitigating evidence offered by the defendant. The Supreme Court of Arkansas affirmed, noting that the statute in question clearly provides that evidence may be presented as to any matter relevant to punishment, including, but not limited to, victim impact evidence. The Court noted further that while the statute requires that the defendant and the state be accorded an opportunity to rebut such evidence, it does not provide that such evidence be limited to rebuttal. The Court found further that the defendant had too narrow an interpretation of Payne v. Tennessee, 501 U.S. 808, 111 S. Ct. 2597, 115 L. Ed. 2d 720 (1991). The Payne Court held that, if the State concluded that evidence about a murder victim and about the impact of the murder on the victim’s family was relevant to the jury’s decision as to whether to impose the death penalty, then the State could properly choose to admit victim impact evidence.