The district courts are directed to discontinue using such language in questionnaires and during voir dire. Maupin, J. and Rose, J., concurring and dissenting, would have found that the cumulative effect of the repeated references to the equal treatment of the possible punishments, which led to the improper exclusion of jurors was error requiring a new sentencing. When questioning makes it evidence that a potential juror would exclude death penalty as appropriate sentence regardless of the nature of the evidence, court's obligation under Witherspoon is to excuse the juror. Thus no error in removing jurors.
Court upholds trial court.
If defendant were allowed to ask the question, he would be able to determine how the juror would vote during the penalty phase. This goes beyond determining whether a potential juror will apply the law to the facts and is not required by the Morgan decision or the constitution.