Opinion ID: 1828411
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: For-Cause and Peremptory Juror Challenges

Text: Owen argues that the postconviction trial court erred in denying his claim that his counsel was ineffective for not challenging for cause or using a peremptory challenge to remove three jurors. The trial court did not err in denying this claim. In Carratelli v. State, 961 So.2d 312, 324 (Fla.2007), this Court held that where a postconviction motion alleges that trial counsel was ineffective for failing to raise or preserve a cause challenge, the defendant must demonstrate that a juror was actually biased to be entitled to relief. The Court explained: A juror is competent if he or she can lay aside any bias or prejudice and render his verdict solely upon the evidence presented and the instructions on the law given to him by the court. Lusk [v. State], 446 So.2d [1038] at 1041 [(Fla. 1984)]. Therefore, actual bias means bias-in-fact that would prevent service as an impartial juror. Under the actual bias standard, the defendant must demonstrate that the juror in question was not impartial i.e., that the juror was biased against the defendant, and the evidence of bias must be plain on the face of the record. Id. (citation omitted). The precise issue raised in Carratelli was trial counsel's failure to preserve for appeal the trial court's denial of a challenge for cause. However, this Court agreed with the Fourth District that failing to preserve the denial of a challenge for cause is tantamount to failing to make a challenge for cause. Id. at 316. Thus, counsel's failure to exercise a cause challenge or a peremptory challenge against a juror is likewise subject to the postconviction standard set forth in Carratelli. Owen is not entitled to relief because he did not demonstrate that an actually biased juror served on his jury. Owen argues that trial counsel should have removed juror Knowles, who had recently been the victim of a home invasion where her daughter was raped, because that crime was similar to the crime at issue in Owen's trial. This argument is without merit. Knowles' responses during voir dire indicated that she would be able to lay aside any bias or prejudice and render [her] verdict solely upon the evidence presented and the instructions on the law given to [her] by the court. Lusk, 446 So.2d at 1041. Based upon the totality of Knowles' responses in her voir dire, Owen has not shown her to be actually biased. Next, Owen argues that trial counsel should have removed two jurors, jurors Matousek and Griffin, because those jurors indicated a personal belief that the death penalty should be automatically imposed under certain circumstances. This argument is without merit. The record demonstrates that despite her personal viewpoint, juror Matousek stated a willingness and ability to lay aside her possible bias and follow the trial court's instructions. Juror Matousek never equivocated as to whether she could follow the law, and accordingly, Owen has not shown her to be actually biased. Juror Griffin's responses during voir dire created some doubt as to whether she could lay aside her belief and apply the law in the circumstance of multiple victims. However, as set forth in Carratelli, while the standard for obtaining a reversal upon the erroneous denial of a cause challenge on direct appeal is relatively lenient, consideration of a postconviction claim must be more restrictive. 961 So.2d at 320. To be entitled to postconviction relief, Owen must demonstrate that juror Griffin was actually biased, not merely that there was doubt about her impartiality. While Griffin answered that she [p]robably would vote for the death penalty in the circumstance of multiple victims and gave confusing answers regarding how she would consider mitigating evidence, she ultimately stated that she would consider mental health testimony and that such testimony could influence her toward a life sentence. No evidence of bias is plain on the face of the record. Id. at 324. [12] Thus, Owen did not demonstrate that juror Griffin was actually biased.