Opinion ID: 2517841
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Analysis of Decision Granting Three Prosecution Challenges

Text: Prospective Juror M.B. initially stated on voir dire that he could keep an open mind on sentencing, and did not oppose the death penalty. He admitted, however, that he did not want the responsibility of making such a difficult decision himself. He was reluctant to pass judgment on any capital defendant, and doubted he could impose death even if the evidence indicated it was appropriate in the particular case. M.B. emphasized that he might vote for life regardless of the evidence in order to avoid making a decision on death. When defense counsel asked whether he could conceive of a case in which death would be a viable option, M.B. said, no. Prospective Juror G.G. stated at the start of voir dire that he did not oppose the death penalty and would not automatically vote against it. However, most of his answers seemed to contradict this view. G.G. said he would be bothered by having to make such a difficult decision, and wanted somebody else to do it. G.G. gave several reasons for not wanting to sit on a capital jury, including the fact that he was HIV-positive and had once spent several nights in jail. G.G. would not say yes when asked pointblank whether he could, and would, consider imposing death based on the evidence. Instead, he continued to equivocate, and said, I would not want to put somebody to death right now. G.G. declined to tell either the prosecutor or defense counsel that death was a possibility in any case. Prospective Juror B.T. strongly disfavored the death penalty. On the one hand, he said he would try to suppress such feelings, and would not automatically reject death or ignore the evidence. On the other hand, he thought it was wrong for anybody, including him as a juror, to take a life. Later, after a break in questioning, B.T. said his feelings had crystallized and that he could not say the death penalty was morally appropriate in any case. In other words, he would almost always vote against it. Though their responses were not uniform or absolute, all three of the foregoing jurors indicated they would have extreme difficulty imposing capital punishment, even in an appropriate case. Those answers, in combination with the trial court's firsthand observations, could give rise to a definite impression that [their] views on the death penalty would substantially impair the performance of [their] duties. ( Lewis and Oliver, supra, 39 Cal.4th 970, 1007, 47 Cal.Rptr.3d 467, 140 P.3d 775.) We thus defer to the court's ruling sustaining the prosecution's challenges for cause.