Opinion ID: 2644492
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Failure to Excuse a Juror for Cause

Text: 3 Mr. Carbonell claims the trial court violated his Sixth Amendment right to an impartial jury when it refused to excuse a potentially biased juror for cause. See Aplt. Br. at 4, 7-9. The CCA denied this claim on direct appeal, stating that the record supported the trial court’s determination that the prospective “juror did not have a preconceived opinion regarding [Mr. Carbonell’s] guilt.” People v. Carbonell (Carbonell I), No. 00CA1258, slip op. at 5 (Colo. App. July 11, 2002) (unpublished). The district court, citing United States v. Martinez-Salazar, 528 U.S. 304, 307 (2000), observed that even if a trial court erroneously denies such a challenge, there is no Sixth Amendment violation where, as here, “the defendant elects to cure such an error by exercising a peremptory challenge.” Id. at 307. The district court therefore concluded that the result reached by the CCA should be afforded AEDPA deference. See Richter, 131 S. Ct. at 784-85; Aycox v. Lytle, 196 F.3d 1174, 1177 (10th Cir. 1999). Mr. Carbonell’s argument that using one of his peremptory challenges for this juror prevented him from otherwise using his full allocation of such challenges on other jurors does not overcome Martinez-Salazar. We conclude that reasonable jurists could not debate the district court’s analysis and therefore deny COA on this issue.