Leo Louis Kaczmar, Iii, Appellant v. State of Florida, Appellee — Pariente, J., Concurring in Part and Dissenting…

Summary

Justice Pariente concurred in affirming the murder conviction but would have reversed the death sentence and remanded for a new penalty phase. She reasoned that the jury’s unanimous death recommendation did not render the sentencing error harmless because the jury heard virtually no mitigation, while the judge alone heard substantial mitigating evidence that had affected the outcome of the first penalty phase. She also concluded that the trial court improperly gave great weight to a recommendation made without a meaningful presentation of mitigation. Senior Justice Perry, dissenting, likewise would have found the sentencing error not harmless because the record did not establish that the jury unanimously found and weighed the aggravating circumstances.