Opinion ID: 1723757
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: trial counsel was ineffective for failing to object to the prosecution's exercise of challenges, and the trial court's upholding of these challenges, against three jurors.

Text: ¶ 25. On direct appeal, Ricky Chase raised the following issue: The trial court erred in excusing jurors for cause in violation of Mississippi law and the Sixth, Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the Federal Constitution. The specific jurors in question were Freddie Jackson, Nellie Tillman and Dena Hall. As to these potential jurors, this Court found: Since Chase raised no objection to any of these rulings, his claim is procedurally barred. Without relaxing the bar, this Court also looks to the underlying merits of the claim. A. Freddie Jackson The trial court stated that Mrs. Freddie Jackson was excused because of conscientious scruples against the infliction of the death penalty. Mrs. Freddie Jackson vacillated back and forth, more or less, but she said `I don't think I could vote for the death penalty under the circumstances... .' No objection was raised by Chase. B. Nellie Tillman Chase devotes two short paragraphs to arguing that Ms. Nellie Tillman was improperly excused as a juror. Chase contends that there is nothing in the record to support excusing this juror for cause. The record indicates otherwise. While neither the prosecutor nor the judge stated why Ms. Tillman was excused, the record shows that Ms. Tillman knew Chase but stated that she could be impartial. Ms. Tillman was a diabetic and had high blood pressure. She had read about the case in the newspaper and heard it on television and, in addition, she worked with Chase's sister-in-law. Ms. Tillman had a ten year old daughter, the child's father worked on the road as a truck driver, and there was nobody to take care of the child. She indicated that this would definitely weigh heavily on her mind. As the State noted, this Court in Billiot v. State, 454 So.2d 445, 457 (Miss. 1984), stated: Generally a juror who may be removed on a challenge for cause is one against whom a cause for challenge exists that would likely effect his competency or his impartiality at trial. In this instance, there were several grounds to support the challenge for cause of Ms. Tillman. C. Dena Hall Dena Hall was excused pursuant to Miss. Code Ann. § 13-5-1 (1972). This section excludes persons under the age of 21 from jury service. Ms. Hall was nineteen years old. Chase contends that this provision violates the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution and Article 3, §§ 14 and 26 of the Mississippi Constitution. This Court has previously considered the exclusion of persons under 21 from jury service and has consistently held that the exclusion does not violate the state or federal constitution. This assignment of error is procedurally barred and, alternatively, without merit. Chase, 645 So.2d at 844-45 (citations omitted). The standards used in Chase have been followed in more recent capital cases decided by this Court, including Walker v. State, 671 So.2d 581 (Miss. 1995); Jackson v. State, 672 So.2d 468 (Miss. 1996); and Taylor v. State, 672 So.2d 1246 (Miss. 1996). As this Court considered the matter on the merits and found that the jurors were properly excused, we find that trial counsel was not ineffective for failure to object.