c. Specific Circumstances: Statutory Mitigation.

• Jurisdiction: Arizona

i. Not Given Weight as Mitigation.

• Where the defendant was a sociopath. Richmond, 114 Ariz. at 197.

• Where an expert testified that the defendant had a borderline personality. Greenawalt, 128 Ariz. at 173.

• Where the defendant had a sociopathic-psychopathic personality. Vickers, 129 Ariz. at 515.

• Where the defendant presented expert testimony that he had an anti-social personality. McMurtrey, 136 Ariz. at 101-02.

• Where the state and defense experts disagreed about whether the defendant had been insane, dissassociative, or impulsive; undifferentiated between capacities. McMurtrey, 151 Ariz. at 109.

• Where the defendant suffered from borderline personality disorder. Brewer, 170 Ariz. at 504-05.

• Where the defendant claimed he would automatically do what his accomplice brother told him to, but the experts said the defendant was not suffering from any identifiable mental disease. Apelt, 176 Ariz. at 377.

• Where the defendant asserted that he had an impulsive personality disorder, which was exacerbated by the use of drugs or alcohol, but he had not used such before the killings, so the defendant failed to prove an impairment of a capacity to conform. Wood, 180 Ariz. at 70-71.

• Where the defendant asserted post-traumatic stress disorder as mitigation, presenting expert testimony that it made him impulsive, especially when intoxicated, but the defendant failed to prove that he had been intoxicated; no proof of impairment of capacity to conform conduct; impulsiveness not explicitly described as a personality disorder. King, 180 Ariz. at 282-83.

• Where the defendant had a conduct disorder with impulse control problems. Bolton, 182 Ariz. at 314.

• Where the defendant presented evidence that he had a passive-aggressive personality,

...