With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". after a finding is made that the aggravating circumstances outweigh the mitigating circumstances. Thus, proportionality in a death penalty case is the last step in the sentencing analysis when determining whether the sentence should be aggravated to a sentence of death. Iri essence, it is the last line of defense against aggravation of a life sentence to a sentence of death. Second, as the Florida Supreme Court has long held, a “proportionality review requires a ‘discrete analysis of the facts, entailing a qualitative review by this Court of the underlying basis for each aggravator and mitigator rather than a "quantitative analysis.’” Ocha v. State, 826 So.2d at 965-66 (quoting Urbin v. State, 714 So.2d 411, 416 (Fla.1998)). See also Silvia v. State, 60 So.3d 959, 974 (Fla.2011) (<HOLDING>). Thus, under a proportionality analysis, the

A: 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
B: holding that dependent upon the circumstances of the case a defendants deportability could be viewed as either a mitigating or an aggravating factor
C: holding that a proportionality analysis entails a qualitative rather than a quantitative review of the aggravating and mitigating circumstances
D: holding that it was permissible to ask whether a juror would consider death sentence if juror determined aggravating circumstances outweighed mitigating circumstances
C.