Opinion ID: 1262799
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Questioning as to Propensity Toward Death Penalty

Text: Beavers next assigns error to the trial court's refusal to resubmit the following question to the jury panel: Do you believe that if one is convicted of taking another's life, the proper penalty is loss of your own life? [1] Beavers argues that the court's ruling on this question prevented him from learning whether any member of the jury panel was predisposed in favor of the death penalty. In a capital murder trial, potential jurors are questioned to assure that those who would invariably impose capital punishment be removed from the panel. If this purpose is satisfied, it is not reversible error for the trial court to deny defense counsel additional questions on this subject. Mueller v. Commonwealth, 244 Va. 386, 401, 422 S.E.2d 380, 390 (1992); Morgan v. Illinois, ___ U.S. ___, ___ ___, 112 S.Ct. 2222, 2232-33, 119 L.Ed.2d 492 (1992). A review of the record in this case shows that the trial court posed questions to prospective jurors that were sufficient to provide Beavers with a basis upon which he could challenge prospective jurors for cause, based on a potential juror's position concerning imposition of capital punishment. Each juror was asked, [i]f the jury should convict the defendant of capital murder, would you be able to consider voting for a sentence less than death? Those jurors who did not answer affirmatively were questioned individually. The questions asked by the trial court and the replies thereto fully exposed any possible bias of the potential jury members with respect to the imposition of the death penalty. The trial court did not abuse its discretion when it refused Beavers's proffered predisposition question.