Opinion ID: 1122547
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Alleged Witt error

Text: (11a) Defendant contends the trial court erred when it dismissed for cause prospective juror Cathy Wilken. During voir dire examination, Wilken explained she had a bias against the death penalty and did not believe she could vote in favor of a death verdict. Her responses nonetheless were somewhat equivocal; she acknowledged the possibility she could vote in favor of the death penalty. When asked whether she could evaluate penalty phase evidence pursuant to the trial court's instructions and vote in favor of the death penalty if that were the appropriate punishment, however, Wilken replied, I truly don't know. In excusing Cathy Wilken, the trial court relied upon Wainwright v. Witt, supra, 469 U.S. 412, in which the United States Supreme Court held that a juror is disqualified from serving in a capital case if his or her views regarding the death penalty would `prevent or substantially impair the performance of his duties as a juror in accordance with his instructions and his oath.' ( Id. at p. 424 [83 L.Ed.2d at pp. 851-852], fn. omitted.) This court has adopted the Witt standard. ( People v. Ghent (1987) 43 Cal.3d 739, 767 [239 Cal. Rptr. 82, 739 P.2d 1250].) (12) Our task on review is to determine whether the trial court's finding that the juror's beliefs would substantially impair the performance of the juror's duties is fairly supported by the record. ( People v. Johnson, supra, 47 Cal.3d at p. 1223 [quoting Darden v. Wainwright (1986) 477 U.S. 168, 175 [91 L.Ed.2d 144, 153-154, 106 S.Ct. 2464]; see also People v. Cox (1991) 53 Cal.3d 618, 646-647 [280 Cal. Rptr. 692, 809 P.2d 351]; People v. Daniels (1991) 52 Cal.3d 815, 875 [277 Cal. Rptr. 122, 802 P.2d 906].) (11b) The record supports the trial court's finding. Wilken's responses indicated she was troubled by the prospect of sitting on a penalty phase jury and was uncertain whether she could set aside her bias against the death penalty in favor of weighing the evidence and following the trial court's instructions. Under these circumstances, the trial court properly could find that her views would substantially impair the performance of her duties at the penalty phase. Accordingly, no error appears.