With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". drinking problem and Dr. Krop testified that his substance abuse aggravated a frontal lobe disorder. Critically, the State concedes that appellant suffered such addictions. Because appellant’s evidence of alcohol and substance abuse is uncontested, the trial court erred in declining to find this mitigating factor. See Mahn, 714 So.2d at 400-01. Nevertheless, we find this error to be harmless given the weighty aggravating factors present. See Pietri v. State, 644 So.2d 1347, 1354-55 (Fla.1994)(applying harmless error analysis to trial court’s erroneo 96)(affirming death sentence after proportionality review where defendant had one aggravator consisting of a prior second-degree murder, with several non-statutory mitigating circumstances); Pope v. State, 679 So.2d 710, 713, 716 (Fla.1996)(<HOLDING>); Johnson v. State, 660 So.2d 637, 641, 648

A: holding death penalty proportionate where the trial court found ccp and three other aggravators and twentynine nonstatutory mitigators
B: 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
C: 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
D: holding death sentence proportionate where defendant murdered exgirlfriends daughter and court upheld four aggravating circumstances ccp hac murder committed while engaged in a kidnapping and previous capital felony and four nonstatutory mitigating circumstances mental illness at time of crime good father would die in prison if given life sentence and no disciplinary problems in prison
C.