Opinion ID: 1747978
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Refusing to Submit Appellant's Proposed Jury Questionnaire

Text: Appellant contends the trial court erred and abused its discretion in refusing to submit his proposed jury questionnaire, part of which contained a number of questions concerning racial attitudes. (For example: 1. Please describe what dealings you have had, either personally or professionally, with people of different races; 4. If you are white, have you ever felt hostility from black people. If yes, please describe the circumstances and how you felt; 6. How do you feel about interracial dating?) The prosecutor objected to the questionnaire on grounds, inter alia, that it contained many open-ended questions that did not address the venirepersons' ability to follow the instructions of the court. Defense counsel responded, in part, that he wanted the venirepersons to take the time to fill out the questionnaire after arriving at the courthouse, and that the approximately 150 questionnaires could then be used by both parties during voir dire. Finding that this process would be a cumbersome and inefficient use of the court's time, the trial court denied Appellant's motion to submit the questionnaire. We find no error or abuse of discretion in the trial court's ruling. Appellant's claim on this matter fails to recognize the cases holding that there is no constitutional right to the submission of written questions to a jury panel. See State v. Parker, 886 S.W.2d 908, 921 (Mo. banc 1994). [I]ndeed, oral voir dire is preferred because it reveals credibility. Id. Moreover, Appellant has not shown that the trial court prevented him from orally asking any necessary questions during voir dire.