Opinion ID: 900573
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 15

Heading: Drabek

Text: [¶ 38.] After the defense ostensibly explained the sentencing phase, it asked Drabek whether she would automatically impose the death penalty. In response, she specifically asked for more clarifying information about the sentencing phase: Are you supposed to have, if it came to that, is there something you're supposed to base your decision on with those? [¶ 39.] Later, State gave a thorough, easily understood explanation of the sentencing phase, after which the following exchange took place: Q: Okay. And I guess the question that we need to know is, would you be willing as a juror to keep an open mind until you've heard all of the evidence at the sentencing phase before you made up your mind or would you just go into sentencing and say, I'm automatically going to sentence this person to death? A: I didn't realize, I guess  I guess the way you explained it that I just, that's what I was trying to ask when, you know, when he's convicted if he's convicted guilty without a reasonable doubt in your mind after evidence that you have these two choices and that was it, that's the end. I didn't realize that they could come off saying maybe this person has had, was abused or ____ Q: Right. Exactly. A: ____ or to any of that degree. Q: And they could if they wanted to, present that kind of evidence. What Mr. Gienapp wanted to ask you, would you be willing to listen to that type of evidence if it was presented, keep an open mind and after hearing all the evidence then make a decision as to whether or not to impose the death penalty or impose life in prison. A: Yes. Q: Could keep an open mind. A: Um-hum. (Affirmative response.) Q: Your Honor, we would resist the challenge. THE COURT: Ms. Drabek, I just want to ask you a question to make sure I understand it. Are you indicating that you would follow the Court's instructions and in making that decision about whether to impose the death penalty you would fully consider the evidence on both sides and you're not preconceived that you would automatically impose the death penalty? A: Yah. Because I guess when I was trying to ask him I thought that once he's, if somebody was convicted and you saw it that way you wouldn't say they were guilty unless you thought they were guilty from the evidence, so I just felt like at that point here's your choices, this is what is going to happen to this person, either it will be life without parole or death, that's it. Those were our choices at that point. I didn't realize that it would go on and you would hear an argument or [sic] either way of which way you should go with it. THE COURT: Okay. But all you're saying is you would be willing to consider that? A: Right. THE COURT: You're not automatically committing to the death ___ A: No. I thought that was the point we'd make our decision.