Full opinion text
PER CURIAM. Ralston Davis was charged by indictment in Broward County with three counts of first-degree murder arising from the December 2, 2005 shooting deaths of Myo-sha Proby, Ravindra Basdeo, and Carlos Jones. Davis entered a plea of not guilty by reason of insanity. The jury rejected Davis’s insanity defense and convicted him of each count of first-degree murder. At the end of the penalty phase, the jury recommended life imprisonment for the murders of Basdeo and Jones, but recommended death for the murder of Proby by a vote of eight to four. The trial court followed the jury’s recommendations, imposing two sentences of life imprisonment and one sentence of death. Davis now appeals his convictions and sentences. We have jurisdiction. See art. V, § 3(b)(1), Fla. Const. For the reasons set forth in this opinion, we affirm the convictions for first-degree murder and sentences of life imprisonment, but find that the sentence of death is disproportionate. Accordingly, we vacate the death sentence and remand the case to the trial court for imposition of an additional sentence of life in prison. I. STATEMENT OF THE CASE AND FACTS A. The Guilt Phase The evidence presented at trial established that on the evening of Friday, December 2, 2005, between 10:30 p.m. and 11:00 p.m., appellant Ralston Davis engaged in a violent rampage with an AR-15 semiautomatic assault rifle. According to the State’s evidence, Davis first went to the home of his friend, Myosha Proby, and shot her to death. Davis then drove to a nearby gas station, where he killed Ravin-dra Basdeo and Carlos Jones, seemingly at random. The defense did not dispute that Davis committed the murders, but presented expert witnesses and other evidence to establish that at the time of the offenses, Davis was suffering from a brief psychotic disorder and was legally insane. 1. The State’s Evidence As background, the State presented the testimony of Randy Reddick, Jr. Reddick testified that he was a gun collector and that the rifle used by Davis oxiginally belonged to him. Reddick stated that on November 30, 2005, he and Davis were both at a mutual friend’s house when he mentioned to Davis that he was planning to sell the rifle. Davis asked to see the rifle, Reddick showed it to him, and Davis offered to buy it. Reddick said that when he sold Davis the rifle, Davis was “[h]is normal calm, cool, collected self.” Reddick testified that at that time he had known Davis for three years, that they had previously visited a shooting range together, that Davis was always a polite and respectful person, and that he saw no problem with selling him the rifle. The first reported incident on the evening of December 2 occurred shortly after 10:30 p.m. Jerry Nicholson testified that he was working as a chef at a barbecue stand on the corner of Northwest 31st Street and Sunrise Boulevard in Ft. Laud-erdale, when he saw a car stop at a green light in the middle of the intersection, blocking traffic. A man got out of the car, jumped on top of the car’s hood, and began firing a gun into the air. The incident was reported in a call to 9-1-1 at 10:35 p.m. Nicholson could not identify the car or the shooter, but shell casings that were later recovered from the intersection were identified as having been fired from Davis’s gun. Shortly after the reported incident at the intersection, Davis arrived at the apartment of Myosha Proby. Hermione Harrell testified that she was at Proby’s apartment in Lauderhill on the evening of December 2. Harrell said that she had gone out with Davis several months before, but that she had decided not to continue dating him and that she introduced Proby to Davis. Harrell testified that on December 2, she and Proby ate dinner and watched a movie. Harrell stated that she was getting ready to go out with friends later in the evening. Proby asked to use Harrell’s phone, while Harrell took a shower. When Harrell got out of the shower, Proby looked upset. Proby said that she had called Davis and that he sounded irate about something. Proby called Davis back. When Davis answered, Harrell could hear him yelling through the phone and heard him say the words, “come out.” Proby told Harrell, “[Hje’s going to come kill me.” Harrell responded that Proby should call the police. Harrell also tried to call Davis’s phone again. When Davis did not answer, Harrell sent him a text message that said, “Sorry for disturbing you, this is your homegirl Tish, call me when you get this message.” Harrell testified that Davis knocked on the door of the apartment several minutes later and that Proby let him in. Jason Rolle testified that he was walking up the stairs to his cousin’s second floor apartment when he saw Davis park his car in front of the apartment building. Davis left the car door open with the ignition running, and music was blaring loudly from the car. Rolle testified that Davis began walking up the stairs behind him. Davis was carrying a gun, was bleeding from his mouth and nose, and looked as if he had just been in a fight. Rolle stated that Davis “had a serious face, like he was in the Army or something” and that Davis looked “pissed off.” Davis walked past Rolle at the top of the stairs and banged his fist on the door of an apartment located across the hall from the apartment of Rolle’s cousin. When Rolle saw Davis cock the gun, Rolle walked back down the stairs, called his cousin, and told him not to open his apartment door. Rolle heard gunshots soon after. Harrell testified that when Proby let Davis into the apartment, he began yelling, ‘You set me up, you set me up.” Harrell recalled Proby saying, “That wasn’t my brother,” and that Davis responded, “I know.” However, Davis continued yelling, “You set me up, you set me up.” Harrell said that Davis had a slight stagger, seemed unsteady on his feet, had bloodshot eyes, and that he appeared to be “on something.” Harrell said she had “never seen him like that.” ’When Davis entered the apartment, he went directly to Proby and paid no attention to Harrell. After repeatedly telling Proby, “I know it’s not your brother,” Davis told Proby to “Get the ‘F’ down.” Harrell testified that Pro-by got on her knees with her back to Davis, folded her arms, and that Davis “just started shooting her.” Davis walked around the coffee table and continued shooting Proby, then stood on top of the coffee table while continuing to fire down at her. Harrell testified that she ran, opened a sliding glass door which led onto the balcony, jumped to the ground from the second floor and ran into a wall, fracturing her ribs, wrist, and ankle. Harrell hid in a laundry room until she heard emergency sirens. After leaving Proby’s apartment, Davis drove back toward the intersection of Northwest 31st Street and Sunrise Boulevard. Jerry Nicholson testified that twenty or thirty minutes after observing Davis fire into the air at that intersection, a car pulled into the parking lot of the Exxon gas station where Nicholson’s barbecue stand was located. Witnesses testified that at that time, several dozen people were standing at or around the barbecue stand. Nicholson saw Davis get out of his car with a rifle. Farrah Cyprien, Nicholson’s sister, saw Davis tapping on the window of another car, and heard him say to the driver, ‘You don’t know me, you don’t know me.” Christian Gaines and Ebony Deadwyler were also in the parking lot of the Exxon station. Gaines observed a silver Chevy Lumina pull into the parking lot, playing music loudly. Gaines saw Davis get out of the silver car and walk to another car nearby. Gaines heard what sounded like an argument, followed by a muffled pop sound. Deadwyler had a clearer view of the events. She saw Davis pull into the gas station, jump out of his car and walk up to another car. Deadwyler testified, “I heard him yelling and cursing, and he just shot the guy.” The victim was later identified as Ravindra Basdeo. John Diggs was also sitting in his car in the parking lot of the Exxon station, and observed Basdeo’s shooting. Diggs said that everyone in the parking lot scattered, while he tried to lean his seat back so that Davis would not see him. However, Davis noticed Diggs and started walking toward Diggs’ ear. According to Diggs, Davis said something indicating that Basdeo had done something to offend him. At that point, another man, Carlos Jones, walked out of the gas station. Diggs saw Davis grab Jones, putting his arm around Jones’s neck and shoulder. Davis then told Jones, “Get on the ground or I’m going to kill you.” Jones got on his knees and Davis immediately shot him. Davis returned to his car and drove out of the gas station. Gaines and Deadwyler also observed the second shooting. They said that Davis drove out of the gas station just as the police were driving in. Detective Kerri Hagerty testified that she was on road patrol with her partner, Detective Jeffrey Jenkins, when they received a dispatch at 10:51 p.m. reporting that a black male in a Chevy Lumina was waving an assault rifle out of his car window. As they approached the intersection of 31st and Sunrise, they saw Davis leaning out of the window of the silver Lumina. They pursued the Lumina until it turned into the parking lot of a strip mall. Davis got out of the Lumina and the officers got out of their car. Jenkins observed that Davis was bleeding from the mouth. Hag-erty testified that Davis did not appear to be holding a gun when he got out of the car, but that she and Detective Jenkins drew their guns and ordered him to get on the ground. Davis yelled back at them, “I ain’t got my f* * :|!ing diamond earrings on.” Hagerty said that she was wearing diamond stud earrings at the time, but agreed on cross-examination that it was “a pretty disjointed statement under the circumstances.” Davis jumped back in his car and drove out of the parking lot, narrowly avoiding Hagerty and Jenkins. Hagerty and Jenkins returned to their car and again pursued Davis as he ran through a red light, drove over a sidewalk, wove in and out of traffic, and ran several cars off the road. At the intersection of Sunrise Boulevard and the Florida Turnpike, Davis stopped his car suddenly, threw his keys out of the window, opened the door, and “just sat there.” Davis began to struggle as Detective Jenkins pulled him from the car. Hagerty and Jenkins attempted to restrain Davis as other officers arrived on the scene. Hagerty said that Davis was very angry, combative, and violent, and that he was cursing and spitting blood as the officers attempted to restrain him. Officer Adam Willson was following Jenkins and Hagerty as they pursued Davis, and assisted them in pulling Davis from the car. Willson testified that Davis was screaming, flailing, and kicking, and appeared extremely angry. Davis was placed in handcuffs but continued flailing. Willson then used a taser to incapacitate Davis. He said that Davis would calm down as each two-to-three second shock was administered, but that Davis would continue flailing and screaming again once the shock ended. Willson said that Davis was laughing as he struggled, and yelled, “Jesus is great” numerous times. Davis was placed in a police car, but started screaming again and kicking the windows. Officer Michael Connor testified that even after Davis was restrained, he continued rambling and saying things with religious overtones, including that Jesus would forgive him. Officer Michael Bigwood said that Davis’s behavior was “erratic and all over the place.” He said that Davis would change from second to second, “go[ing] from being somewhat compliant and quiet, to yelling, to kicking, to spitting, to back to quiet.” The officers testified that Davis eventually calmed down completely. Detective Joseph Carmody testified that after Davis was restrained, a man identifying himself as Ralston Davis, Sr., Davis’s father, arrived at the scene. Detective Carmody told Mr. Davis that his son had to be taken to the hospital, but promised that he would call him when they arrived at the sheriffs office. Davis was transported to the hospital at 1:08 a.m. He allowed a doctor to clean his wounds and agreed to a CAT scan, but would not agree to stitches, antibiotics, a blood draw, or anything involving a needle. Detective Carmody remained with Davis at the hospital for two hours. He said that Davis seemed normal and did not appear to be hallucinating. Davis was taken to the Broward County Sheriffs Office at 3:41 a.m. Homicide Detective Frank Ilarraza testified that when he learned Davis was going to be transferred to the sheriffs office, he set up a video camera in an interrogation room. Ilarraza turned on the camera at 3:55 a.m., and turned it off approximately five hours later at around 9:00 a.m. An edited DVD of the recording was submitted into evidence at trial and was played for the jury. Davis appears disoriented in the video, and much of his speech is transcribed as “unintelligible” in the official trial transcript. At the beginning of the video, Davis is seen in the interview room with Detective Carmody. Davis was brought a change of clothes and the clothes he wore at the time of the offenses were collected. Davis mentioned that he was in ROTC and that his father was in the Army. He said to Detective Carmody, “I almost went into the Army. I don’t think it was meant to be though. I was meant to fight this war.” When Detective Carmody removed Davis’s handcuffs, Carmody commented, “Bad day, right?” Davis responded, “It’s been a good day.” Detectives Carmody and Ilar-raza also collected biographical information from Davis. Davis said that he was twenty-one years old, that his family was Jamaican, and that he graduated from Piper High School in 2003. Davis’s parents entered the interrogation room at approximately 6:18 a.m. Davis’s mother asked Davis if he knew who they were. He identified his mother as “mom,” but said that his father was “the king.” They asked Davis what happened to his face and said that Davis needed medical treatment. Davis responded that he was alright. Davis’s parents asked him to tell them what happened. Davis said, “God put me out there to subtract somebody.” He continued, “Big sister ..., she betray me, so I murdered her.” He also said, “I was just on a mission, just taking care of business.” They again asked what happened to Davis’s face, and Davis responded that he was fighting with “[sjome dudes.” Mr. Davis asked about the people Davis was fighting. MR. DAVIS, SR.: What you have to fight about? RALSTON DAVIS: For my thrown [sic]. Tell (unintelligible) move to the side, I’m going to get mine. MR. DAVIS, SR.: Move to the side where? RALSTON DAVIS: Get out the way, it’s my time now, N-O-W, move to the side, time for the young man to take it over and run the whole city. MRS. DAVIS: Run the whole city? RALSTON DAVIS: Run the whole city, live like a king forevermore, walking the path of righteousness. Davis mentioned his assault rifle and Mr. Davis asked why he had a gun. Davis responded, “Because me rod and me staff comfort me, that’s why it’s used.” Davis’s parents asked about the people Davis killed. Davis said that his “big sister” was Bahamian. Mr. Davis asked Davis why he killed her. Davis said, “She pretend — she come into my life like my big sister (unintelligible), a sister real close to me. She was born the day before my birthday.” Davis’s parents replied that Davis had real sisters and that they were worried about him. Davis said, “I’m all right, I’ll get a new one, I feel like I done my job, mission complete, and if there’s some more to go, pass me the AR-15.” Davis’s father responded, “Let me get back to this big sister thing, we want to understand.” Davis said that she was “phony.” RALSTON DAVIS: She said she was my big sister, she claimed to be my big sister, oh (unintelligible), this, that, and the other. She take me and like (unintelligible), call me bro, me start calling her big sis, she said (unintelligible) like a brother, she act like I’m like her brother (unintelligible), I ain’t real, he gangster. I really recommend (unintelligible). MRS. DAVIS: She don’t have a little brother? RALSTON DAVIS: (Unintelligible). The one who beat me. MRS. DAVIS: Her brother beat you? RALSTON DAVIS: (Unintelligible). The same, you know, the same people me end up fight (unintelligible). I park across the street and (unintelligible), I park across the street, I watched them, and the AR-15 comes out, four of them, four. (Unintelligible) send them across the street— MR. DAVIS, SR.: What street? RALSTON DAVIS: — while me watch, straight across the street. By Sunrise Boulevard. (Unintelligible). That’s the test, them OG’s, they done walked up and walked down the road already. They beat me up, but it’s all good, I feel that love, I feel the love, love, one love; black, white, Arab, Chinese, Indian, Jamaican, Haitian. Davis’s mother said that she loved him, but that she did not support what he did. The conversation continued: RALSTON DAVIS: How about the Arab man? MRS. DAVIS: The Arab man? RALSTON DAVIS: Like Indian boy, or whatever him is. MRS. DAVIS: I don’t know about him. You didn’t tell me about him. RALSTON DAVIS: I follow my instinct, and he disrespect me, I swerved on 31st. MRS. DAVIS: Yeah. RALSTON DAVIS: Before we get behind the king, when me cut across the lane, boy disrespect me and go around me. MRS. DAVIS: Oh yeah? MR. DAVIS, SR.: But since when do you go— RALSTON DAVIS: So me follow him in a gas station, me make him open his mouth. MRS. DAVIS: Oh yeah? RALSTON DAVIS: And then (unintelligible) people at the barbecue, barbecue shopping, and I dump in they mouth, and everyone that shot not living anymore. I murdered his ass cause he tried me. I be a snake out there, pure snake. Shortly afterward, Detective Carmody entered the room and informed Davis’s parents that they would have to leave. Davis’s mother told Davis that they would pray for him. Davis replied, ‘Yeah, pray for me. Tell — tell—tell the man I did my mission, and if he got more missions for me to do, I’m ready, it’s my time.” The video concluded after several officers arrived to take Davis to jail. At trial, several witnesses for the State testified concerning the documentation of evidence. Shell casings recovered from all locations matched Davis’s rifle. The State also presented the testimony of Dr. Rein-hard Motte, the medical examiner who conducted the victims’ autopsies. Motte testified that there were twenty-three entrance gunshot wounds on Myosha Proby’s head, back, and buttocks. Motte concluded that a single gunshot to the head was most likely the first shot fired and would have killed Proby instantly. He said that the angle of the entrance wounds indicated that Proby fell down onto the floor after being shot in the head, and that the other wounds were inflicted subsequently. Motte’s examination of Ravindra Basdeo indicated that Basdeo was shot once while seated in his car and that the gun was fired from inside Basdeo’s mouth. Motte testified that Basdeo would have died instantly. Motte found that Carlos Jones was shot four times, once each in the head, the right arm, the left side of the back, and the right shoulder. Motte determined that Jones’ head wound was inflicted at close range and would have been fatal; although, Motte could not determine the order in which the wounds were inflicted. 2. The Defense’s Evidence Defense counsel did not dispute the essential facts of the case, but sought to establish that at the time of the offenses, Davis was suffering from a temporary psychotic disorder and was legally insane. In support of this argument, the defense presented three mental health experts: Dr. Allan Ribbler, Dr. Abbey Strauss, and Dr. Dennis Day. Each expert testified to his belief that Davis was suffering from a stress-induced psychotic disorder at the time of the murders. In addition, the defense presented witnesses establishing Davis’s unusual behavior in the period leading up to and following the murders. The defense’s first witness was Davis’s mother, Marcia Davis. Mrs. Davis testi-fled that Davis is one of six children, that she and her husband are both ministers, and that the family is very religious. She testified that Davis first started behaving uncharacteristically withdrawn around November 2005. On Wednesday, November 30, Davis got into a fight with his father, who threw him out of the house. When Davis had not returned by 3:00 a.m., Mrs. Davis called Davis and told him to come home. She found him asleep at the kitchen table the next morning at 6:00 a.m. He then went to bed fully dressed. Mrs. Davis testified that when Davis got up approximately three hours later, wearing the same clothes, he seemed energetic and excited, and told her that he wanted to be a “singer for God.” He also asked her, “How do you know when God is talking to you?” Mrs. Davis asked if he thought God was talking to him. Davis replied, “Yes,” but would not say anything else. Later in the day, Davis told his mother that he had met a girl who would be his “big sister.” He said that he had known her for several weeks, and that if his father kicked him out he could come live with her. Mrs. Davis left for an appointment and did not see Davis again until Friday. Mrs. Davis testified that on Friday morning, Davis was wearing the same clothes he had been wearing since Wednesday. He gave his mother roses and told her that he wanted to be involved in her church. Davis’s phone rang and he answered it. After getting off of the phone, he said that the girl he talked about before had invited him to breakfast. Mrs. Davis said that Davis was fidgeting and constantly looking behind him. She asked if he was on drugs, and he said he was not. Mrs. Davis saw Davis again later that evening. Davis went to his parents and said that his father was “the king.” Mr. and Mrs. Davis began to talk to him, but Davis’s phone rang and he left the house. Later that night, some people came to the door and told Davis’s parents that they had seen Davis surrounded by policemen near the Florida Turnpike. Mrs. Davis drove there with her husband and saw Davis on the ground, restrained by several officers. She and her husband spoke to one of the officers and later visited Davis at the police station. She said that when they arrived, Davis seemed disoriented. Mrs. Davis asked Davis whether he recognized them, because when they entered the room he did not seem to know who they were. The defense also presented several witnesses who described Davis’s behavior following the shootings. Victoria Oldag was an emergency medical technician at the Broward County Jail. Oldag evaluated Davis when he was brought to the jail on December 3, the morning after his arrest. Davis was talking to himself, giggling, and would not make eye contact. At times he would stare off into space. Oldag wrote, “violent, unable to sign,” on Davis’s medical intake form, and checked boxes for “hallucinations” and “bizarre behavior.” Curtis White testified that he was a correctional deputy at the jail. White testified that Davis was “totally rowdy” when he was brought in and that Davis was kicking and yelling. White could not understand many of the things Davis was saying. Davis would talk to himself and recite scripture. Davis remained at White’s unit for approximately one week. White said that Davis’s behavior slowly improved over that time, but Davis was still acting bizarrely and made comments about God talking to him. Dorothy Ferraro testified that she was an assistant public defender in Broward County. She went to see Davis on the week of December 20, 2005. When Ferraro was brought to Davis’s holding cell, Davis was jumping up and down and yelling gibberish. Ferraro felt that Davis was mentally unstable, and based on that meeting had him evaluated for competency to stand trial. The defense’s three mental health experts — Dr. Ribbler, Dr. Strauss, and Dr. Day — testified that Davis was suffering from a brief psychotic disorder and was legally insane. Dr. Ribbler testified that under the DSM-IV manual, a brief psychotic disorder requires the presence of one of four symptoms: delusions, hallucinations, disorganized speech, or grossly disorganized or catatonic behavior. In Davis’s case, Dr. Ribbler found that Davis exhibited both hallucinations and delusions, manifested as the voice of God speaking to him. According to Dr. Rib-bler, brief psychotic disorders are stress-induced and, while rare, typically occur in individuals in their late-teens to early-twenties. Each expert interviewed Davis several times and essentially learned the same information. A short time before the offenses, Davis had been a witness for the prosecution in a murder trial concerning a stabbing at Piper High School. The trial arose out of an incident where one of Davis’s friends was assaulted and stabbed to death in Davis’s presence. Davis attempted to perform CPR, but the friend died in his lap. Dr. Strauss found that Davis was extremely stressed following the trial because he was afraid that he was not a strong enough witness. On the evening of Wednesday, November 30, 2005, Davis had a fight with his father, who threw him out of the house. Davis reported that he spent that night in his car and awoke the next morning with a euphoric feeling. That day, Davis came to believe that he had been chosen by God to fulfill a mission. Davis spent the day being charitable to people, visited a friend in the hospital, and forgave his father for their fight. In addition, a man approached Davis on the street and began speaking to him about the Bible and King Solomon, which Davis felt was not a coincidence. On Friday morning, Davis received a call from Myosha Proby, who invited him to breakfast. However, Davis’s mother convinced him not to go because he did not know Proby very well. On Friday evening, Davis went to a music studio with friends, where they smoked marijuana. Davis returned to the studio alone later in the evening. Davis reported that he was talking on his phone and a group of men told him to be quiet. This resulted in an altercation; the men threw Davis out of the studio and beat him up. One of the men threatened Davis with a gun, causing Davis to go to his car and retrieve his rifle. At that point, Davis received a call from Proby. He came to believe that the call was not a coincidence, and that his “mission” was to kill her. Davis went to Proby’s apartment and shot her to death. As Davis was driving away from Proby’s apartment, another car swerved around Davis’s car on the road. Davis took this as a sign of disrespect for God and concluded that the driver was evil. Davis then followed the car into a gas station and shot the driver, Ravindra Basdeo. Davis could not explain what caused him to kill Carlos Jones. Dr. Strauss testified that the video recording of Davis’s conversation with his parents supported a conclusion that Davis was psychotic. Davis was able to speak with his parents in a safe environment and seemed committed to the idea that he had completed a mission. Although Davis appeared calm in the video, Dr. Strauss noted that psychoses fluctuate and that individuals with psychotic disorders can have periods of greater and lesser lucidity. Dr. Strauss testified that his conclusions were further supported by medical records from Davis’s time at the Broward County Jail. On a medical intake form dated December 3, the evaluator concluded that Davis should be placed under psychological observation. On December 6, the reviewing physician wrote that Davis exhibited bizarre behavior and “remain[ed] psychotic.” Davis continued to exhibit symptoms of psychosis, and was eventually placed on Risperdal, an antipsychotic. The medication was not discontinued until March 13. Dr. Strauss found this timeline consistent with his diagnosis of a brief psychotic disorder, which generally remits within one to two months, but may sometimes last longer. On cross-examination, Dr. Strauss agreed that behavior similar to psychosis can be caused by cocaine use. However, Dr. Strauss explained that he ruled out drugs as a cause of Davis’s behavior. Dr. Strauss noted that cocaine-induced psychoses are extremely rare. Further, while cocaine leaves a person’s system within four to five hours, Davis was found incompetent to stand trial on January 26, 2006. Dr. Strauss also noted that Davis remained on Risperdal until March 13, indicating that there was a clinical need for it. The defense’s final mental health expert, Dr. Day, agreed with Dr. Strauss that the time frame surrounding Davis’s symptoms was inconsistent with a drug-induced psychosis. Dr. Day stated that while there was no evidence Davis had used cocaine, there was significant evidence that Davis had suffered several major stressors in the period leading up to the offenses. Dr. Day noted that Davis had been a witness in a murder trial, which caused him to feel a tremendous amount of fear and paranoia. Davis came to believe that there was a curse on him or that an evil power was trying to hurt him. Dr. Day thought getting kicked out of his house may have been “the final straw that broke the camel’s back.” Dr. Day noted that Davis had no history of mental illness, so the episode appeared to be a brief psychotic disorder. All three mental health experts testified that they believed Davis was legally insane at the time of the murders. 3. The State’s Rebuttal In rebuttal, the State presented the testimony of psychologist Dr. Lori Butts. In contrast to the defense’s experts, Dr. Butts concluded that Davis was not insane. Dr. Butts found several sources of information that indicated Davis was malingering, including jail medical records, notes by Davis’s girlfriend, a competency evaluation by Dr. Trudy Block-Garfield, and psychological testing conducted by Dr. Bran-non. With regard to the jail records, Dr. Butts concluded Davis’s reported symptoms were exaggerated and were inconsistent with real mental illness. Dr. Butts also stated that she had reviewed a diary written by Davis’s girlfriend. In the diary, Davis’s girlfriend wrote that she heard Davis’s mother tell Davis that he should convince authorities that he was “crazy.” In addition, Dr. Butts cited a mental health evaluation conducted in April 2006, in which a psychiatrist concluded that Davis was malingering. Dr. Butts believed that Davis was not suffering from a stress-induced psychosis, but rather that he was under the influence of drugs at the time of the murders. She found that Davis’s behavior could have been consistent with the use of cocaine, ecstasy, or amphetamines. Other information indicated that Davis may have been using drugs. Davis had admitted using marijuana, which Dr. Butts testified could have been laced. Hermione Harrell reported that she knew Davis used ecstasy, and Davis’s girlfriend wrote that he went to get pills on the day of the murders. Additionally, Davis was known to sell drugs, and crack cocaine was found in his car following his arrest. Dr. Butts also observed that Davis’s behavior fluctuated in the period leading up to the shootings, from peaceful in the morning to violent in the evening. Dr. Butts testified that taking all data into account, she believed the most likely explanation for Davis’s behavior was that he was using substances. Dr. Butts concluded that Davis’s behavior indicated that even if he was mentally ill, he knew that his actions were wrong. Following Dr. Butts’ testimony, the State rested. The jury subsequently convicted Davis of all three counts of first-degree murder. B. The Penalty Phase At the penalty phase, the State largely relied on the evidence presented during the guilt phase. However, the State introduced photographs of Myosha Proby and Ravindra Basdeo, as well as victim impact statements by Tabitha James, the sister of Myosha Proby, Sandra Basdeo, the sister of Ravindra Basdeo, and Elsa Jones, the mother of Carlos Jones. After the reading of the victim impact statements, the State rested. Marcia Davis, the defendant’s mother, testified again at the penalty phase. Mrs. Davis said that she moved to New York City from Jamaica in 1982. In New York, she met Ralston Davis, Sr., the defendant’s father, who was also from Jamaica. Ral-ston Davis, Jr., the defendant, was their first child. Due to financial problems, they decided to move the family to Ft. Lauderdale, Florida when Ralston was five years old. Mrs. Davis brought Ralston and his two younger sisters to live with one of her cousins in Jamaica, while she and Mr. Davis established themselves in Florida. The children remained in Jamaica for approximately one year. Mrs. Davis learned from a friend that the children were not being fed, were essentially being left to take care of themselves, and that Ralston was being beaten. She was told about an incident where Ralston ran away and was eventually discovered under a house, where he had been hiding for two or three days. Mrs. Davis went to Jamaica and brought the children to live with her husband’s family. However, Mrs. Davis later learned that the children were being treated the same way. The children were not being fed or cared for and were being forced to sleep on the floor. She also learned that the children were largely being left in the care of an ex-girlfriend of Mr. Davis, who was beating Ralston. Mr. and Mrs. Davis moved the children to Florida when Ralston was six years old. Mrs. Davis said that Ralston was picked on in school because of his Jamaican accent. When he was eight years old, he once came home with a broken nose and a missing tooth. Mrs. Davis said that Ral-ston was a kind and loving child and that he did not like to fight. She said that the family owned a grocery store and restaurant in Miami. The business was robbed in 1992, which destroyed the family financially. At that point, the children were taken back to Jamaica to live with another cousin. However, Mrs. Davis learned that the children again were not being taken care of and were being beaten. She said that Ralston still has a scar on his upper arm from being whipped. Mrs. Davis and her husband were not able to support themselves in Florida, so they decided to move back to Jamaica. They and their six children moved into a two bedroom shack with no running water. Mrs. Davis eventually decided to return to Florida to find a job, while the family remained in Jamaica. While the children were with their father, she learned that Ralston was being molested by a preacher’s assistant. At this point, Ralston was twelve or thirteen years old. Mrs. Davis decided to send Ralston to live with his paternal grandmother in New York when he was fourteen or fifteen. However, Ral-ston did not have a good relationship with his grandmother, who would sometimes not feed him and at one point kicked him out of her house. Eventually, Mrs. Davis brought all of the children back to Florida. When Ral-ston was in high school and close to graduation, he came home and told her that one of his friends had died. Ralston said that his friend had been stabbed and that he tried to resuscitate him and bring him to the hospital, but that the friend died in his arms. Mrs. Davis said that prior to that incident Ralston was always outgoing and would bring friends over to their house. After his friend’s death, Ralston became much more withdrawn. She said that he was especially upset around the time of the trial on the stabbing because he believed that the other boys involved in the incident were lying about what happened. Mrs. Davis said that when she saw Ralston after the shootings on December 2, 2005, he looked like a different person. She said that she should have taken Ralston to see a doctor when he began acting strangely the preceding Wednesday. Ralston Davis’s younger sister, Ruth Davis, testified about the children’s experience in Jamaica when she was three years old and Ralston was five. She said that they were not fed and that the people they were living with would beat Ralston with a switch. Later, when they lived in Florida, Ralston was picked on and beaten by other children because of his accent. She recalled one incident when he came home with his nose bloodied and a tooth missing. On another occasion, several other children broke his arm. Ruth testified that Ralston was always a loving and kind person, that he was very outgoing, and that he considered everyone he met to be his friend. She testified that he was behaving very abnormally in the days leading up to the shootings. Marjorie Morrison-Smith testified that she was a friend of the Davis family and had known Ralston for ten years. She testified that Ralston was always a kind, sweet, loving kid, that he was very reliable, and that she could always call him if she needed help with something. Daren Davis testified that he was Ralston’s younger brother. He testified that Ralston was a good brother. Ralston encouraged him to go to school and stay out of trouble, and once paid the fees for him to play little league football. Kerron Matthew testified that he and Ralston were friends in high school. Matthew testified that whenever he did not have money for lunch, Ralston would split his food or give him money. He said that Ralston was never violent and tried to stay out of trouble. Pamela Richardson testified that she was friends with Ralston and his mother. She said that Ralston was always a good person to her and that she could always call him if she needed anything. Charesse Sanford testified that she had known Ralston for six years and that he was the father of her son, who was three years old. She testified that Ralston was never violent with her and that she brings their son to see him often. Ralston Davis also testified, describing the events leading up to the murders. Davis said that the person who committed the murders was not him and that he felt horrible about what happened. As its final witness, the defense presented Dr. Michael Brannon, a psychologist. Dr. Brannon testified that he was initially retained in 2006 to evaluate Davis’s competency to proceed. In January 2006, Dr. Brannon administered a test for malingering and the results indicated that Davis was not faking. Davis scored highly on testing for paranoia, and his scores were similar to those of individuals suffering from paranoid delusions. Dr. Brannon also reviewed documentation of the offenses and Davis’s family history, and met with Davis approximately ten times. Dr. Brannon found that Davis’s childhood was chaotic, that he had moved frequently, and that he suffered significant physical abuse as well as sexual abuse. Despite Davis’s childhood, Dr. Brannon found that Davis did not show any characteristics of having a psychopathic personality. Dr. Brannon stated that in more recent testing, Davis no longer scored highly for paranoid delusions and his scores were in the normal range. Dr. Brannon concluded that Davis was suffering from a brief psychotic reaction at the time of the offenses. He believed that based on Davis’s history, “he was predisposed to have some mental health issues under undue stress or pressure.” Dr. Brannon found that the period before the murders was particularly stressful based on a number of factors, including the death of Davis’s friend, the fact that his father had thrown him out, and that his girlfriend was pregnant. Dr. Brannon concluded that Davis was under the influence of extreme mental or emotional disturbance, acted under extreme duress, and was substantially impaired in his ability to appreciate the criminality of his conduct or to conform his conduct to the requirements of the law. At the end of the penalty phase, the jury recommended a sentence of death for the murder of Proby by a vote of eight to four. The jury recommended life imprisomnent for the murders of Basdeo and Jones. C. The Spencer Hearing The trial court held a Spencer hearing on September 10, 2009. The defense first presented Dr. Lori Butts, who testified on behalf of the State during the guilt phase. At the Spencer hearing Dr. Butts testified that Davis’s behavior at the time of the offenses was inconsistent with his behavior both before and after the incident. While she could not rule out the possibility that Davis was suffering from an organic psychotic disorder, she believed it was more likely that Davis was suffering from a substance-induced psychosis at the time of the offenses. Regardless, Dr. Butts believed that Davis was suffering from some type of psychosis and that his ability to make decisions was impaired. The defense next presented Dr. Alan Ribbler. Dr. Ribbler reaffirmed his belief that Davis was insane at the time of the offense. Dr. Ribbler also testified that he believed Davis’s capacity to appreciate the criminality of his conduct or to conform his conduct to the law was substantially impaired. The defense’s third witness was forensic psychologist Dr. Michael Brannon. Dr. Brannon testified that Davis was under the influence of extreme mental or emotional disturbance at the time of the offense, and that Davis’s capacity to appreciate the criminality of his conduct or to conform his conduct to the requirements of the law was impaired. The defense’s fourth witness was Dr. Abbey Strauss. Dr. Strauss reaffirmed his position that Davis was legally insane at the time of the crimes, and testified that he believed both statutory mental health mitigators were met as to the murder of Myosha Proby. Finally, the defense presented Dr. Dennis Day, who also reaffirmed his conclusion that Davis was legally insane at the time of the crimes, and testified that he believed both statutory mental health mitigators applied. D. Sentencing The trial court issued its sentencing order on January 7, 2010. As to the murders of Ravindra Basdeo and Carlos Jones, the trial court followed the jury’s recommendations and imposed two sentences of life imprisonment. As to the murder of Myosha Proby, the trial court found and assigned weight to the following aggravating circumstances: (1) Davis was contemporaneously convicted of another capital felony (i.e., the contemporaneous murders of Basdeo and Jones) (great weight); (2) the murder was especially heinous, atrocious, or cruel (HAC) (great weight); (3) the murder was committed in a cold, calculated, and premeditated manner without any pretense of moral or legal justification (CCP) (great weight); and (4) the crime was committed in the course of a burglary (slight weight). The trial court further found and assigned weight to the following statutory mitigating circumstances: (1) Davis has no significant history of prior criminal activity (little weight); (2) the crime was committed while Davis was under the influence of extreme mental or emotional disturbance (moderate weight); (3) Davis’s capacity to appreciate the criminality of his conduct or to conform his conduct to the requirements of the law was substantially impaired (moderate weight); (4) Davis’s age (twenty-one) at the time of the crime (slight weight). The trial court also found ten nonstatutory mitigating circumstances, which it assigned little or slight weight. The court concluded that the aggravating circumstances outweighed the mitigating circumstances, and imposed a sentence of death. II. ANALYSIS A. Guilt Phase Issues Davis raises the following challenges on appeal pertaining to the guilt phase of his trial: (1) the trial court erred in allowing Hermione Harrell to testify over a hearsay objection that Myosha Proby said to her, “He’s going to come kill me”; (2) reversible error occurred when the jury viewed a DVD on which Davis invoked his right to remain silent; (3) the trial court erred in denying the motion to suppress the DVD of Davis and his parents; (4) the trial court erred in allowing the jury to view a state-prepared transcript of the recorded conversation between Davis and his parents; and (5) the trial court erred in allowing Dr. Butts to testify about the cause of Davis’s behavior when Public Defender Dorothy Ferraro visited him in the jail. We also review the sufficiency of the evidence supporting Davis’s convictions for first-degree murder. As discussed below, we find each challenge to be either without merit or harmless, and affirm Davis’s convictions. 1. Hermione Harrell’s Testimony We first review Davis’s hearsay challenge to the testimony of witness Her-mione Harrell. At trial, Harrell described the circumstances leading up to the shooting of Myosha Proby. Harrell explained that she took a shower while Proby called Davis. When Harrell got out of the shower, Proby looked upset. Proby told Harrell that she had called Davis, and that Davis was irate and seemed upset about something. They called Davis back. Harrell said that she could hear Davis yelling at someone else through the phone. As Proby was on the phone with Davis, she was mouthing words to Harrell. Over a hearsay objection by the defense, Harrell was allowed to tell the jury what Proby told her. Harrell said, “He told her, she repeated, he’s going to come kill me.” Section 90.802, Florida Statutes (2009), states: “Except as provided by statute, hearsay evidence is inadmissible.” Davis argues that the trial court erred in overruling the defense’s hearsay objection to Harrell’s testimony. The State counters that although the trial court did not identify the basis for its ruling, the court could have admitted the statement either as a “spontaneous statement,” or as an “excited utterance.” The two exceptions are defined as follows: The provisions of s. 90.802 to the contrary notwithstanding, the following are not inadmissible as evidence, even though the declarant is available as a witness: (1) Spontaneous statement. — A spontaneous statement describing or explaining an event or condition made while the declarant was perceiving the event or condition, or immediately thereafter, except when such statement is made under circumstances that indicate its lack of trustworthiness. (2) Excited utterance. — A statement or excited utterance relating to a startling event or condition made while the de-clarant was under the stress of excitement caused by the event or condition. § 90.803, Fla. Stat. (2009). A trial court’s decision to admit evidence is reviewed under an abuse of discretion standard. See Hudson v. State, 992 So.2d 96, 107 (Fla.2008). “The trial court’s discretion is constrained, however, by the application of the rules of evidence and by the principles of stare decisis.” Hayward v. State, 24 So.3d 17, 29 (Fla.2009) (citations omitted). Additionally, “the trial court’s ruling on an evidentiary matter will be affirmed even if the trial court ruled for the wrong reasons, as long as the evidence or an alternative theory supports the ruling.” Muhammad v. State, 782 So.2d 343, 359 (Fla.2001). We find that the statement at issue qualifies as an excited utterance. This Court has described the exception as follows: The excited utterance exception contained in section 90.803(2) requires that the “statement or excited utterance” relate to “a startling event or condition” and be made while the declarant was under the stress of excitement caused by the event or condition. We have explained that to qualify as an excited utterance, the statement must be made: (1) “regarding an event startling enough to cause nervous excitement”; (2) “before there was time to contrive or misrepresent”; and (3) “while the person was under the stress or excitement caused by the event.” Henyard v. State, 689 So.2d 239, 251 (Fla.1996). This Court has observed that “[i]f the statement occurs while the exciting event is still in progress, courts have little difficulty finding that the excitement prompted the statement.” State v. Jano, 524 So.2d 660, 662 (Fla.1988) (quoting Edward W. Cleary, McCormick on Evidence § 297 at 856 (3d ed. 1984)). “While an excited utterance need not be contemporaneous to the event, it must be made while the declarant is under the stress of the startling event and without time for reflection.” Hutchinson v. State, 882 So.2d 943, 951 (Fla.2004) [abrogated on other grounds by Deparvine v. State, 995 So.2d 351 (Fla.2008) ]; see also Rogers v. State, 660 So.2d 237, 240 (Fla.1995). Hudson, 992 So.2d at 107. In this case, Proby’s statement satisfies the three prongs of the exception. First, the statement must be made “regarding an event startling enough to cause nervous excitement.” Henyard, 689 So.2d at 251. Here, Harrell testified that when she emerged from the shower, Proby looked upset. When they called Davis, Harrell could hear Davis yelling at another person through the phone. Other witnesses testified that Davis was not a violent person and that this behavior would have been out of character for him. After the phone call, Harrell encouraged Proby to call the police. Thus, the trial court could have properly found that the phone call was “startling enough to cause nervous excitement.” Id. As to the second and third prongs, the statement must be made “before there was time to contrive or misrepresent” and “while the person was under the stress or excitement caused by the event.” Id. Here, Harrell testified that Proby made the statement as she was on the phone with Davis. “If the statement occurs while the exciting event is still in progress, courts have little difficulty finding that the excitement prompted the statement.” Jano, 524 So.2d at 662. In Hudson, for example, this Court held that a witness was permitted to testify concerning a phone conversation he had with a murder victim just before the victim’s death. The victim told the witness that the defendant was in his house with a gun and that the defendant had announced his intent to kill the victim. See Hudson, 992 So.2d at 108. We found the statements admissible, explaining, “The statements were made while the event was ongoing, rather than being related after the event, negating the likelihood that [the victim] had time to contrive or misrepresent; and the statements were made while [the victim] was under the continuing stress or excitement caused by the event.” Id. Similarly, in this case, Proby reported that Davis had announced his intent to kill her while she was still on the phone with him. The fact that the statement was made while the conversation was ongoing indicates that she did not have time to contrive or misrepresent, and that she was still under the stress of Davis’s death threat. Accordingly, we find that the trial court could have properly admitted the statement under section 90.803(2). 2. Evidence of Davis’s Right to Remain Silent We next address whether the jury was improperly presented with evidence that Davis invoked his right to remain silent. The factual basis for this claim arises from the video recording of Davis’s time at the sheriffs office. After Davis was arrested but before he was brought into the interrogation room, Detective Frank Ilarraza set up a video camera, which was switched on at 3:55 a.m. At approximately 4:35 a.m., Detective Ilarraza informed Davis of his Miranda rights. Daws then invoked his right to remain silent and his right to counsel. Prior to trial, Davis filed a motion asking the trial court to exclude the portion of the recording in which he invoked his rights. The motion asserted that Dr. Lori Butts had been retained by the court to evaluate Davis’s mental condition at the time of the crimes. The motion further asserted that in the defense’s deposition of Dr. Butts, she had expressed her opinion that Davis was not legally insane at the time of the crimes, basing her opinion in part on the fact that Davis asked for an attorney and invoked his right to remain silent. The trial court granted the motion. In its order, the court observed that Davis had filed a Notice of Insanity. Citing State v. Burwick, 442 So.2d 944 (Fla.1983), the trial court found that it was impermissible to rely on a defendant’s invocation of his or her rights as evidence of the defendant’s mental condition at the time of an offense. Accordingly, the trial court prohibited the State “from showing those portions of the audio/visual recording of the Defendant, while in custody, where he invokes his right to remain silent and asks for his attorney.” A DVD of the recording was introduced at trial on June 29, 2009. Prior to the DVD’s admission, the State assured the trial court that the offending portions of the recording had been deleted. On that basis, the court allowed the DVD to be played to the jury. At first the recording proceeded without any difficulties. At the beginning of the recording, an analog clock on the wall of the interrogation room shows the time as 3:53 a.m. Davis is brought into the room approximately one minute later. Approximately forty-two minutes into the recording, Davis is seen speaking with several police officers, including Detective Ilarraza. Shortly thereafter, the clock on the wall changes from 4:85 a.m. to 4:40 a.m. At 4:40 a.m., Detective Ilarraza is seen exiting the room, leaving Davis alone. Thus, the State properly deleted the portion of the recording in which Davis was informed of and invoked his Miranda rights. However, a difficulty with the DVD was encountered during its exhibition at trial. In the DVD, Davis is seen alone in the room from 4:40 a.m. until 5:14 a.m. At 5:14 a.m., the clock on the wall changes to 4:25 a.m., returning to a section of the recording in which Davis was speaking with the officers. The trial record indicates that when the DVD returned to this earlier portion of the recording at trial, the parties and the court thought an error had occurred with the trial court’s video system. The prosecutor fast-forwarded the DVD to 5:55 a.m., shortly before Davis’s parents were brought into the room. In fact, an error had occurred in the editing of the DVD itself. In the process of preparing the recording for trial, the State seemingly re-recorded a portion of Davis’s conversation with the police officers onto a later section of the DVD. In that time, Davis is seen speaking with the police officers from 4:25 a.m. until 4:35 a.m. Unlike the first time this conversation appears on the DVD, the recording does not immediately skip forward from 4:35 a.m. to 4:40 a.m. Instead, the recording continues for several additional seconds. In that time, Detective Ilarraza is seen explaining that he will advise Davis of his rights: DET. ILARRAZA: ... [B]efore we go on to talking about what happened tonight, I have to go over your rights. You know what your rights are, right, under the law? RALSTON DAVIS: Remain silent? DET. ILARRAZA: Well, yeah. Let me go over them and then you can decide what you want to do, okay, it will be up to you. At this point in the DVD, the screen freezes, and the clock skips forward to 4:40 a.m. Although the prosecutor fast-forwarded over this portion of the DVD at trial, the DVD was sent to the jury during its deliberations. The error was not discovered until the ease was being prepared for appeal. Davis now argues that the submission of the challenged portion of the DVD to the jury violates the holding of Burwick and its progeny. In Burwick, this Court addressed following issue: [Wjhether the state may introduce evidence of a defendant’s post-arrest conduct, including silence and the request to see an attorney after receiving Miranda warnings, as it relates solely to the issue of mental condition near the time of the offense when the defendant has asserted the insanity defense and the evidence is presented by the state in rebuttal. 442 So.2d at 945 (citation omitted). In that case, the defendant was charged with sexual battery and burglary with assault. Id. At trial, the defense presented evidence that Burwick was insane at the time of the offenses. In rebuttal, the State was allowed to present the testimony of the police officers who arrested Burwick. The officers testified that after Burwick was read his rights, he told the officers that he did not want to make a statement and shortly thereafter requested an attorney. Id. at 946-47. This Court held that it was error to allow the State to use evidence of the defendant’s invocation of his right to remain silent to rebut the defense of insanity. We explained, “There is no dispute that it is reversible error for the prosecution to attempt to impeach a defendant’s alibi testimony by asking on cross-examination why he remained silent at the time of his arrest.” Id. at 947 (citing Doyle v. Ohio, 426 U.S. 610, 96 S.Ct. 2240, 49 L.Ed.2d 91 (1976); United States v. Hale, 422 U.S. 171, 95 S.Ct. 2133, 45 L.Ed.2d 99 (1975)). Discussing the Supreme Court’s decision in Hale, we concluded that just as evidence of a defendant’s silence may not be used as evidence of guilt, such evidence is similarly impermissible as evidence of the defendant’s mental condition. Id. at 948. We concluded: It is fundamentally unfair for the state to lure Burwick into remaining silent and then impeach the man with this very same silence. To permit the state to benefit from the fruits of its own deceptions violates the due process clause of the fourteenth amendment and article I, section 9, of the Florida Constitution. Id. We also observed that in Wainwright v. Greenfield, 474 U.S. 284, 106 S.Ct. 634, 88 L.Ed.2d 623 (1986), the United States Supreme Court had similarly held that “because Miranda warnings carry an implied promise that ‘silence will carry no penalty,’ use of a defendant’s post-Miranda silence as evidence of sanity ... violates due process.” Garron v. State, 528 So.2d 353, 355 (Fla.1988) (quoting Greenfield, 474 U.S. at 295, 106 S.Ct. 634). The question before us is whether the recording of Detective Ilarraza informing Davis that he will be read his Miranda rights is “fairly susceptible” of being interpreted as a comment on Davis’s silence. See State v. DiGuilio, 491 So.2d 1129 (Fla.1986) (“In Florida, we have adopted a very liberal rule for determining whether a comment constitutes a comment on silence: any comment which is ‘fairly susceptible’ of being interpreted as a comment on silence will be treated as such.”) (citing State v. Kinchen, 490 So.2d 21 (Fla.1985); David v. State, 369 So.2d 943 (Fla.1979)). As we have explained, “commenting on the silence of an accused is not a viable strategy for obtaining convictions, and any comment — direct or indirect — by anyone at trial on this right is constitutional error that should be avoided.” Ventura v. State, 29 So.3d 1086, 1088-89 (Fla.2010) (original emphasis). On the record in this case, however, we conclude that the rule of Burwick and its progeny was not violated. First, the reading and invocation of Davis’s Miranda warnings were not in fact recorded on the DVD that was submitted to the jury. While the DVD shows Detective Ilarraza explaining that Davis will be read his Miranda rights, that section of the recording stopped before the warnings were actually read. Second, no one commented on Davis’s invocation of his rights at trial. The trial court granted the defense’s motion to prohibit Dr. Butts from explaining that her conclusion regarding Davis’s sanity was based in part on his invocation of rights, and this ruling was adhered to by the prosecution and by all witnesses at trial. On this basis, we find that reversible error did not occur. Nonetheless, we caution that trial courts must be exceedingly careful in ensuring that a defendant’s invocation of his or her right to remain silent is not used against him or her as evidence of guilt. 3. Conversation Between Davis and His Parents Next, we review the trial court’s decision to admit the portion of the interrogation room recording in which Davis spoke with his parents. At trial, Detective Joseph Carmody testified that when Davis was being arrested, a man approached identifying himself as Davis’s father. Mr. Davis asked to speak with his son. Detective Carmody told Mr. Davis that