The Appellant did not make any submission at trial concerning the mitigating circumstances in his case and the Trial Chamber found no mitigating circumstances. On appeal, he argued that the Trial Chamber was obliged to consider mitigating circumstances. The Appeals Chamber found:

231. Pursuant to Rule 101(B)(ii) of the Rules, a Trial Chamber is required to take into account any mitigating circumstances in determining a sentence.[1] The accused, however, bears the burden of establishing mitigating factors by a preponderance of the evidence.[2] The Appeals Chamber notes that the Appellant made no sentencing submissions at trial.[3] In such circumstances, the Trial Chamber’s determination that there were no mitigating circumstances was within its discretion and does not constitute a legal error. If an accused fails to put forward relevant information, the Appeals Chamber considers that, as a general rule, a Trial Chamber is not under an obligation to seek out information that counsel did not see fit to put before it at the appropriate time.[4] Rule 86(C) of the Rules clearly indicates that sentencing submissions shall be addressed during closing arguments, and it was therefore the Appellant’s prerogative to identify any mitigating circumstances instead of directing the Trial Chamber’s attention to the record in general. The Appellant is simply advancing arguments on appeal that he failed to put forward at the trial stage, and the Appeals Chamber “does not consider itself to be the appropriate forum at which such material should first be raised”.[5]

232. In any event, the Appellant’s submissions fail to demonstrate that the Trial Chamber’s finding of “no mitigating circumstances” is unreasonable.[6] […]