Opinion ID: 2575291
Heading Depth: 6
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Excusal of Prospective Juror D.M.

Text: On her juror questionnaire, Prospective Juror D.M. wrote in capital letters and underlined Yes, when asked whether she thought defendant was guilty of the charges. In response to the question, [H]ave you formed any opinions about this case, she wrote, Right now, my vote is for the [d]eath sentence. On voir dire, she stated she understood the law required that she presume defendant innocent, but she had difficulty applying the presumption of innocence to defendant. She stated that she had heard about the case in media reports, and she would find defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, based upon what she had heard in the press, without any evidence being presented. D.M. also noted she had changed her mind concerning the death penalty, and would not be able to at any time be responsible for putting anybody to the death sentence. At the conclusion of the court's questioning, D.M. confirmed she would presume defendant guilty unless the contrary was proved. The prosecutor challenged D.M. under Bittaker, noting: She has an opinion about guilt. She has opinions about penalty ... she's unfair to both sides .... Defense counsel objected that the prosecutor did not have standing to make a challenge for cause under Bittaker. The trial court sustained the challenge, stating: Counsel has the right to raise the issue of whether a juror can be fair and impartial, and this juror ... exhibits the presumption of guilt as to the defendant. I don't see it any way that she is fair and impartial.