Cited by

For example, ¶ 34 (2010), this Court stated, “[w]hile the terms ‘heinous or depraved’ are written in the disjunctive, they, in fact, constitute one prong.” This interpretation lacks any support.

l. Even if Stallings’s statements were testimonial, Fordson’s Confrontation Clause challenge still fails because the clause “does not bar the use of testimonial statements for purposes other 9 STATE v. FORDSON Opinion of the Court than establishing the truth of the matter asserted.” ¶ 12 (2010) (quoting Crawford, 541 U.S. at 59, n.9).

at 227–28 ¶¶ 11–12 (attributing little mitigating weight to twenty-three-year-old defendant who took a leading role in executing and planning burglaries leading to murder); ¶ 80 (2010) (“We discount age as a mitigating factor when the defendant had a significant criminal record or actively participated in the murders.”); ¶¶ 57–58 (2010) (finding significance of a nineteen-year-old defendant diminished when he is a major participant and helps plan the crime in advance).

The Confrontation Clause does not, however, bar the admission of statements for “purposes other than establishing the truth of the matter asserted.” ¶ 12 (2010) (quoting Crawford, 541 U.S. at 59 n.9).

See Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36, 38 (2004); -97, ¶¶ 10-13, -50 (2010) (finding that police officer’s testimony regarding information from an informant did not violate the Confrontation Clause where “[t]he testimony was not offered to prove [the defendant] was involved in the murder.

¶ 21, (finding defendant’s taking steps to avoid being discovered during commission of crime evidence of premeditation).

State v. Womble, 225 Ariz. 91, 99 n.7 ¶ 27, n.7 (2010).4 3 Gratuitous violence was the State’s only theory for the (F)(6) aggravating circumstance of heinousness or depravity.

We “consider the quality and the strength, not simply the number, of aggravating and mitigating factors.” ¶ 50, (quoting State v. Kiles (Kiles II), ¶ 62, ).

___ ¶¶ 24-32, -53 (2010) (holding that application of rule allowing elimination of witness to another crime to form exclusive basis for finding of aggravating factor under A.R.S.