Code of Alabama
Ala. Code § 13A-5-48 (2026)
Process of Weighing Aggravating and Mitigating Circumstances Defined.
✓ official Alabama Legislature (ALISON) text, current July 2026
The process described in Sections 13A-5-46(e)(2), 13A-5- 46(e)(3) and Section 13A-5-47(e) of weighing the aggravating and mitigating circumstances to determine the sentence shall not be defined to mean a mere tallying of aggravating and mitigating circumstances for the purpose of numerical comparison. Instead, it shall be defined to mean a process by which circumstances relevant to sentence are marshalled and considered in an organized fashion for the purpose of determining whether the proper sentence in view of all the relevant circumstances in an individual case is life imprisonment without parole or death.
(Acts 1981, No. 81-178, p. 203, §10.)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 32
cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1987–2025 · leading case: Harris v. State, 632 So. 2d 503 (Ala. Crim. App. 1992).
Harris v. State, 632 So. 2d 503 (Ala. Crim. App. 1992). “Because the sentencing order clearly states that the trial court found the existence of this mitigating circumstance and that it weighed the aggravating circumstance against the statutory and nonstatutory mitigating circumstances, as required by § 13A-5-48, Code of Alabama 1975,…”
Burgess v. State, 811 So. 2d 557 (Ala. Crim. App. 1998). “The court noted that in reaching its determination, it had not engaged in a "mere tallying" of the aggravating and mitigating circumstances, but had, as provided in § 13A-5-48, Ala.Code 1975, marshalled and considered all the relevant circumstances in an organized fashion for…”
Thomas v. State, 824 So. 2d 1 (Ala. Crim. App. 2001). “) Next, the court read § 13A-5-48 (describing the process of weighing the aggravating and mitigating circumstances); § 13A-5-49 (listing the facts that " shall be " aggravating circumstances); [3] and § 13A-5-50 (allowing for *70 the aggravation component of the offense to be…”
Scott v. State, 937 So. 2d 1065 (Ala. Crim. App. 2005). “Code 1975; and that the capital offense was especially heinous, atrocious, or cruel when compared to other capital offenses, § 13A-5-48(8), Ala.Code 1975. The trial court included specific fact findings to support the § 13A-5-48(8) aggravating circumstance.”
Deardorff v. State, 6 So. 3d 1205 (Ala. Crim. App. 2004). “Code 1975; and that the capital offense was especially heinous, atrocious, or cruel when compared to other capital offenses, § 13A-5-48(8), Ala.Code 1975. The trial court included specific fact findings to support the § 13A-5-48(8) aggravating circumstance.”
Ex Parte Burgess, 811 So. 2d 617 (Ala. 2000). “' This would amount to an endorsement of the sort of numerical `tallying' disallowed by § 13A-5-48, Ala.Code 1975, and an abjuration of the weighing function mandated by § 13A-5-47(e), Ala.”
Stanley v. State, 143 So. 3d 230 (Ala. Crim. App. 2011). “Section 13A-5-48, Ala.Code 1975, provides: “The process described in Sections 13A-5-46(e)(2), 13A-5-46(e)(3) and Section 13A-5-47(e) of weighing the aggravating and mitigating circumstances to determine the sentence shall not be defined to mean a mere tallying of aggravating and…”
Demetrius Avery Jackson, Jr. v. State of Alabama., 169 So. 3d 1 (Ala. Crim. App. 2010). “However, the United States Supreme Court has decided that the Alabama system of sentencing in capital-murder eases is constitutional, stating: “The Alabama statute provides that the weighing process ‘shall not be defined to mean a mere tallying of aggravating and mitigating…”
Calhoun v. State, 932 So. 2d 923 (Ala. Crim. App. 2005). “"Furthermore, § 13A-5-48 states: "` The process described in Sections 13A-5-46(e)(2), 13A-5-46(e)(3) and Section 13A-5-47(e) of weighing the aggravating and mitigating circumstances to determine the sentence shall not be defined to mean a mere *974 tallying of aggravating and…”
Lewis v. State, 24 So. 3d 480 (Ala. Crim. App. 2007). “Contrary to Lewis’s contention, however, § 13A-5-48, Aa.Code 1975, explicitly states that the process of weighing the aggravating circumstances and mitigating circumstances to determine a capital defendant’s sentence “shall not be defined to mean a mere tallying of aggravating…”
Hodges v. State, 856 So. 2d 875 (Ala. Crim. App. 2001). “"Furthermore, § 13A-5-48 states: "`The process described in Sections 13A-5-46(e)(2), 13A-5-46(e)(3) and Section 13A-5-47(e) of weighing the aggravating and mitigating circumstances to determine the sentence shall not be defined to mean a mere tallying of aggravating and…”
Gobble v. State, 104 So. 3d 920 (Ala. Crim. App. 2010). “” Section 13A-5-48, Ala.Code 1975, provides: “The process described in Sections 13A-5-46(e)(2), 13A-5-46(e)(3) and Section 13A-5-47(e) of weighing the aggravating and mitigating circumstances to determine the sentence shall not be defined to mean a mere tallying of aggravating…”
— Ala. Code § 13A-5-48(8) — 2 cases
Scott v. State, 937 So. 2d 1065 (Ala. Crim. App. 2005). “Code 1975; and that the capital offense was especially heinous, atrocious, or cruel when compared to other capital offenses, § 13A-5-48(8), Ala.Code 1975. The trial court included specific fact findings to support the § 13A-5-48(8) aggravating circumstance.”
Deardorff v. State, 6 So. 3d 1205 (Ala. Crim. App. 2004). “Code 1975; and that the capital offense was especially heinous, atrocious, or cruel when compared to other capital offenses, § 13A-5-48(8), Ala.Code 1975. The trial court included specific fact findings to support the § 13A-5-48(8) aggravating circumstance.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.