Opinion ID: 1402432
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Dismissing a Prospective Juror for Cause

Text: Defendant contends the trial court erred in excusing one prospective juror for cause. A prospective juror may be excused for cause if that juror's views on the death penalty `would prevent or substantially impair the performance of his duties as a juror in accordance with his instructions and his oath.' [Citations.]... On review, if the juror's statements are equivocal or conflicting, the trial court's determination of the juror's state of mind is binding. If there is no inconsistency, we will uphold the court's ruling if it is supported by substantial evidence. ( People v. Carpenter (1997) 15 Cal.4th 312, 357, 63 Cal.Rptr.2d 1, 935 P.2d 708.) The statements of the prospective juror in question were both conflicting and equivocal. In a juror questionnaire, he made several equivocal responses, but he also stated, I will not vote to put any one to death. During voir dire, when asked about this statement, he said, I'm trying to get out of it. No, I mean I would do the right thing if I was put on a jury. I would do what the law says and ... there's just so much a parameter you are going with. He made a number of other equivocal and contradictory responses, but ultimately responded, It would be hard, when asked whether he could ever personally cast your vote to put him to death. The prosecutor challenged the juror for cause. The court had a lot of mixed feelings about him. It could not tell ... whether he's lying and whether he isn't, really. It granted the motion: It's just that this man is too far out. Maybe your [defense counsel's] description is correct, he's a kind of a philosophical [¶]amlet. But whatever it is he's not a reliable one. Because the prospective juror's statements were equivocal and conflicting, we defer to the trial court's determination. We find no error.