If I am not mistaken, there is only a penalty phase if she is convicted of 1st degree murder. Someone correct me if I am wrong.
You are right CentralFLMama -
"The Florida scheme requires the jury to unanimously find a defendant guilty of first degree murder. Then the same jury (unless the defendant waives a jury? hears evidence to establish statutory aggravating factors (the SA) and statutory on non-statutory mitigating circumstances (DT) The aggravating factors must be established beyond a reasonable doubt. The fact find must only be "reasonably convinced" as to the existence of mitigating circumstances.
While the jury is not required to recommend the death penalty in any case, if the jury finds one or more aggravating circumstances and determines these circumstances sufficient to recommend the death penalty, it must determine whether sufficient mitigating circumstances exist that outweigh the aggravating circumstances.
Based upon these considerations, the jury then recommends whether the defendant should be sentenced to life imprisonment or death. A simple majority of the jury is necessary for the recommendation to be the death penalty. It is not necessary for the jury to agree on the aggravating circumstances."
*quoted from Florida College of Advanced Judicial Studies 2009 - conducting the penalty phase of a capital case.
So, when the SA charged ICA, they listed six aggravating circumstances that caused them to ask for the death penalty. So in the penalty phase, the SA argues that they proved these charges.
The DT argues she should not be put to death for all kinds of reasons, but excluding remorse, no prior criminal history (whoops) the list is quite long.
But for all the case summaries I read while prepping for this phase, I found in every case the jury did give the evidence weight, but basically disregarded them when they voted.
I feel certain if there is a penalty phase, we will be setting up threads to discuss the aggravating and mitigating circumstances at great length (knowing us!)