(CNN) — [Breaking news update, published at 9:40 a.m. ET]

The jury in the death penalty trial of Nikolas Cruz, 24, has reached a decision on whether to sentence the Parkland school shooter to death or life in prison without the possibility of parole.

The jury’s recommendation is expected to be read in court at 10:30 a.m. ET.

Cruz pleaded guilty to 17 counts of murder and 17 counts of attempted murder for the February 2018 shooting at Florida’s Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, in which 14 students and three school staff members were killed, and 17 others were injured.

Jurors must be unanimous to recommend a death sentence under Florida law, or Cruz will receive a sentence of life in prison. If they recommend death, the ultimate decision on Cruz’s sentence would go to Broward Circuit Judge Elizabeth Scherer, who could choose to either follow the jury’s guidance or sentence the gunman, now 24, to life in prison.

[Original story, published at 8:56 a.m. ET]

The 12-person jury tasked with recommending a death sentence or life in prison for the Parkland, Florida, school shooter is expected to examine the AR-15 he used in the 2018 massacre when jurors begin their second day of deliberations Thursday.

The jury asked shortly after 5 p.m. Wednesday, the first day of deliberations, to see the weapon that Nikolas Cruz, now 24, used to carry out the mass shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School — the deadliest at a US high school — in which 17 people were killed.

Broward Circuit Judge Elizabeth Scherer initially said Wednesday she intended to send the firearm to the jury, but was unable to because of “security reasons.” The Broward County Sheriff’s Department did not want to take the unloaded, inoperable firearm back to the jury room at that time.

Lead prosecutor Michael Satz objected, saying he had seen this done in many previous cases, and called the situation “ridiculous” and “preposterous.”

The judge said she was assured the situation would be resolved by the time the judge and attorneys returned to court Thursday morning.

Cruz pleaded guilty last October to 17 counts of murder and 17 counts of attempted murder in connection with the shooting, and his trial proceeded directly to the sentencing phase as a result. Jurors must decide whether to recommend Cruz receive the death penalty — a decision that would need to be unanimous — or life in prison without the possibility of parole.

To make their decision, jurors must weigh the aggravating factors and mitigating circumstances — reasons why Cruz should or should not be put to death — presented by the prosecution and defense during trial.

The state argued Cruz’s decision to carry out the shooting was not only especially heinous or cruel, but premeditated and calculated and not, as the defense contends, related to any neurological or intellectual deficits. To illustrate their point, prosecutors detailed Cruz’s thorough planning for the shooting, as well as comments he made online expressing his desire to commit a mass killing.

In their case, the shooter’s defense attorneys said Cruz had neurodevelopmental disorders stemming from prenatal alcohol exposure, and presented evidence and witnesses claiming his birth mother had used drugs and drank alcohol while pregnant with him. Cruz’s adoptive mother was not open about this fact with medical and mental health professionals or educators, preventing him from receiving the appropriate interventions, the defense claimed.

Jurors need to unanimously agree on death penalty

The jury received instructions from Scherer in court Wednesday morning, about six months after jury selection first began. Opening statements for the sentencing trial began in July.

Jurors are sequestered during deliberations.

If the jurors do not unanimously recommend Cruz get a death sentence, he will be sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole. If the jury does recommend death, the final decision rests with Scherer, who could choose to follow the recommendation or sentence Cruz to life.

To recommend death, all 12 jurors must agree on several things: First, that the state proved beyond a reasonable doubt there was at least one aggravating factor, and that the factor is sufficient to warrant a possible death sentence.

The jurors would then need to unanimously agree that the aggravators outweigh the mitigating circumstances.

Finally, if the jury agrees to those things, they still would need to unanimously find that Cruz should be put to death.

Jurors will consider these questions for each of the 17 murder counts. Cruz would serve life in prison if the jury cannot unanimously agree on death for any of the counts.

Jurors reheard testimony of fetal alcohol spectrum disorder expert

The first day of deliberations saw jurors asking for a readback of at least some testimony from an expert who testified across multiple days.

When Judge Scherer agreed to the readback, jurors were called back into the courtroom. A court reporter then read the cross examination of Dr. Paul Connor, an expert on fetal alcohol spectrum disorder (FASD), who testified for the defense that Cruz has the disorder, along with deficits in IQ, motor skills, executive functioning and memory — elements that would support the defense’s mitigators and a life sentence.

During the cross examination in September, prosecutors pressed Connor on his testing of Cruz and questioned his assessment of Cruz’s capabilities, particularly his visual-spatial skills. Satz pointed to a sharpshooter badge Cruz earned while on the Marjory Stoneman Douglas JROTC team, which required him to fire a pellet and hit increasingly smaller targets from 10 meters away.

“Were you aware,” Satz asked Conner in September, “that the defendant in this case won a sharpshooter badge?”

“No,” Connor responded.

The jury also initially asked to rehear the testimony of Dr. Robert Denney, a clinical neuropsychologist who testified during the state’s rebuttal that Cruz does not meet the criteria for FASD, but does have anti-social personality disorder and borderline personality disorder.

But after rehearing Connor’s cross examination, the jury decided it no longer needed to rehear Denney’s testimony.

The jurors were once again excused to deliberate in private.

In closing arguments Tuesday, prosecutors argued Cruz’s decision to commit the shooting was deliberate and carefully planned, while Cruz’s defense attorneys offered evidence of a lifetime of struggles at home and in school.

“What he wanted to do, what his plan was and what he did, was to murder children at school and their caretakers,” Satz said Tuesday. “The appropriate sentence for Nikolas Cruz is the death penalty,” he concluded.

However, defense attorney Melisa McNeill said Cruz “is a brain damaged, broken, mentally ill person, through no fault of his own.” She pointed to the defense’s claim that Cruz’s mother used drugs and drank alcohol while his mother was pregnant with him, saying he was “poisoned” in her womb.

“And in a civilized humane society, do we kill brain damaged, mentally ill, broken people?” McNeill asked Tuesday. “Do we? I hope not.”

(Copyright (c) 2024 CNN. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.)

Join our Newsletter for the latest news right to your inbox