that the “CCP aggravator is one of the most serious aggravators provided by the statutory scheme,” and upheld the imposition of death where the trial court found four statutory aggrava-tors and three statutory mitigators. 19 So.3d 277, 304 (Fla.2009). In that case, the defendant had obtained a firearm in advance of abducting his victims, drove them to a remote location, and then shot them execution style. Id. at 299. Similarly, evidence presented at Martin’s trial suggested that over the course of the day, Martin executed his plan to steal Jacey’s car and kill her. Martin invited Jacey to spend the evening with him by sending her a series of text messages and calling her. Once they were together, he took her to a remote location where he murdered her with a hammer. Although the mu 98) (<HOLDING>). This Court’s discussion of mental health
holding imposition of the death penalty proportionate where the trial court found two aggravating circumstances ccp and contemporaneous murder two statutory mitigating factors and a number of nonstatutory mitigating factors holding death penalty proportionate where there were two aggravating factors  avoiding arrest and commission during course of a burglary  with some nonstatutory mitigation holding that trial court must consider both statutory and nonstatutory mitigating factors holding death penalty proportionate where there were two aggravating factorsthe murder was committed for pecuniary gain and defendant had been convicted of a prior violent felonyand where there were two statutory and three nonstatutory mitigating circumstances holding death penalty proportionate where the trial court found ccp and three other aggravators and twentynine nonstatutory mitigators