Opinion ID: 1310716
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: Question Interposed by a Juror.

Text: At the conclusion of the evidence, after both sides had rested, a juror asked certain questions, including one concerning a possible accomplice. Stamper's counsel objected when the trial judge suggested, out of the presence of the jury, that he tell the jury that similar charges were pending against another individual. Several variations of language were then discussed, and the trial judge ruled that he would advise the jury that whether more than one person was involved was irrelevant, that the issue was whether Stamper was involved. Stamper's counsel conceded that this wording was better, and the jury was informed in that manner. Stamper now says that this answer to the juror's inquiry improperly permitted the jury to find him guilty of capital murder without proof that he fired the fatal shots. See Johnson v. Commonwealth, 220 Va. ___, 255 S.E.2d 525 (1979). The objection on this ground, not asserted in the trial court, comes too late. Rule 5:21. Moreover, there is no merit to the objection. The instructions adequately informed the jury that they must find that Stamper killed the victims to convict him of the capital murders.