b. Family Love; Family Support; Grief to Family.

• Jurisdiction: Arizona

i. Basic Principles.

(1) Love for and of family may be a mitigating circumstance. Carriger, 143 Ariz. at 162; accord Bible, 175 Ariz. at 606; Spears, 184 Ariz. at 294.

(2) Although familial support can be a mitigating circumstance, it does not require leniency. Bible, 175 Ariz. at 606; accord Ross, 180 Ariz. at 608.

(3) In Trostle, the Court stated that the trial court should have given it some weight. 191 Ariz. at 22.

(4) In Greene, the Court said that it gives mitigating weight to the effect an execution would have on the well-being of the defendant’s children. 192 Ariz. at 443, ¶ 58.

ii. Specific Circumstances.

(1) Given Weight as Mitigation.

• Where the defendant’s family was supportive and would suffer considerable grief from imposition of the death penalty. Richmond, 136 Ariz. at 320.

• Where the defendant loved his family and they loved him, but discounted by the failure of this to keep the defendant from a lifetime of crime. Carriger, 143 Ariz. at 162.

• Where the defendant’s parents went to great lengths to reach out to defendant and support him during the trial. Atwood, 171 Ariz. at 652.

• Where there was love and support for and by family and friends; may have had some mitigating value. Bible, 175 Ariz. at 606.

• Where the defendant had a loving relationship

...