Opinion ID: 1058076
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: Ida Ferguson

Text: During voir dire questioning by the State, Ms. Ferguson acknowledged that she had a religious belief against the death penalty, but stated she could follow the law. She acknowledged having stated on her jury questionnaire that she felt a sentence of life without parole was adequate and that she would not want to consider the death penalty, but reiterated that she ha[d] to obey the laws of the land. In response to subsequent questions by defense counsel, Ms. Ferguson stated that she would have to have very hard evidence to consider imposing either life in prison with no opportunity for parole or the death penalty. The State thereafter used one of its peremptory challenges to remove Ms. Ferguson from the panel. Upon defense counsel's Batson objection, the prosecutor referred to Ms. Ferguson's response in the jury questionnaire to the question, do you have any personal, moral or religious beliefs against imposition of the death penalty? According to the prosecutor, Ms. Ferguson had answered, yes, with the explanation that she believed that a life sentence without parole is adequate, vengeance is mine said the Lord. The prosecutor maintained that the State is striking her based upon the answer to that question. The trial court thereupon overruled defense counsel's Batson objection.