omitted). The jury in this case found beyond a reasonable doubt that Baker was guilty of first degree murder and, upon Baker’s specific request that it address the issue of principalship, found that there was an aggravating circumstance that made Baker eligible for the death penalty. Baker was not able to show any mitigating circumstances that outweighed the aggravating circumstances by a preponderance of the evidence; therefore, the Circuit Court was authorized to sentence Baker to death — the maximum penalty provided for by the statute governing first degree murder. As Judge Wilner examined in Borchardt, the courts of our sister states have not found the holding in Apprendi to be applicable to their capital s ), cert. denied, 532 U.S. 1015, 121 S.Ct. 1752, 149 L.Ed.2d 673 (2001) (<HOLDING>); State v. Storey, 40 S.W.3d 898, 915
holding that apprendi does not apply retroactively holding apprendi does not apply to consecutive sentencing holding that apprendi does not apply to state capital sentencing schemes where judges are required to find certain aggravating circumstances before imposing a death sentence holding that apprendi does not apply on collateral review holding that apprendi does not apply to capital sentencing schemes