Opinion ID: 2812643
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Voir Dire of the Excused Jurors

Text: The questionnaire responses of the dismissed jurors were similar. All three expressed general opposition to the death penalty, although for various reasons. Prospective Juror R.C. wrote: ―I do not believe the death penalty is a humain [sic] punishment. I do not believe the death penalty stops or prevents anyone from committing a crime.‖ Prospective Juror D.A. said, ―I think we should not have a death penalty at all,‖ in response to a question about the frequency with which the penalty is imposed. When asked whether she would refuse to vote guilty simply to avoid a penalty phase, D.A. responded, ―I don‘t believe in [the] death penalty.‖ Prospective Juror N.C. likewise said she ―disagreed‖ with the death penalty, but her reason was that a guilty person put to death ―[would] not suffer anymore.‖ Elsewhere, N.C. said she believed the death penalty is used ―too seldomly.‖ The dismissed jurors also gave similar answers to the questionnaire‘s Witherspoon/Witt questions. Although none said they would refuse to vote for first degree murder or find a special circumstance proven to avoid a penalty phase, all three indicated that if the case reached that phase they would automatically vote for life imprisonment without parole. In response to the question whether he would ―automatically refuse to vote in favor of the penalty of death and automatically vote for a penalty of life imprisonment without the possibility of parole,‖ R.C. wrote, ―I would vote for life imprisonment.‖ Prospective Juror N.C. also answered ―yes‖ to this question and explained that she was simply ―in favor 19 of‖ life imprisonment without parole. Prospective Juror D.A. answered ―no,‖ but in response to the very next question, asking whether she would automatically vote for a penalty of death, D.A. stated, ―Yes, I don‘t believe in death penalty.‖9 However, immediately after disclosing their inclination to vote against the death penalty, all three jurors answered ―yes‖ to questions asking if they would change their answers on automatic voting if instructed to set aside personal feelings and weigh aggravating and mitigating evidence before voting on penalty.10 The court began its inquiry by telling prospective jurors it was going to repeat questions about the death penalty they had already answered. It then asked each panelist the first four Witherspoon/Witt questions from the questionnaire, with very little variation or elaboration. The three dismissed jurors repeated their previous answers, again stating they would automatically vote for life imprisonment without parole over death. When he was asked about returning an automatic vote, Prospective Juror R.C. responded, ―That‘s the one I have a problem with.‖ Pressed for an answer, he said he would vote for life imprisonment ―[r]egardless of the evidence.‖ The court dismissed him for cause and denied defense counsel‘s request for further questioning on whether R.C. could set aside these views and follow the court‘s instructions. Prospective jurors D.A. and N.C. also repeated their questionnaire 9 Read in context, it appears D.A. may have confused this question with the previous one, asking whether she would automatically vote for life imprisonment without parole. Her answer of ―yes‖ to the question whether she would automatically vote for death is immediately contradicted by the rest of the sentence, which restates her opposition to the death penalty. 10 These questions were: ―If your answer to either question (c) or question (d) [regarding automatic voting for life imprisonment without parole or death] was ‗yes,‘ would you change your answer, if you are instructed and ordered by the court that you must consider and weigh the evidence and the above mentioned aggravating and mitigating factors regarding the facts of the crime and the background and character of the defendant, before voting on penalty?‖ And ―Could you set aside your own personal feelings regarding what the law ought to be and follow the law as the court explains it to you?‖ 20 responses about automatic voting. When asked whether they would ―automatically, and in every case, vote for a penalty of life imprisonment without the possibility of parole and never vote for death,‖ D.A. and N.C. both responded, ―Yes.‖ The court dismissed them for cause over defense objection and without asking whether they could set aside these views and follow the law in determining penalty.