Opinion ID: 2259150
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 9

Heading: jury charge as to unanimity of jury verdict

Text: Appellant next claims that he is entitled to a new sentencing hearing because the trial court erred by failing to clearly and thoroughly instruct the jury that they did not have to reach a unanimous verdict in order to sentence appellant to life imprisonment rather than death. Appellant further argues that the verdict slip also improperly required unanimity for purposes of sentencing appellant to life imprisonment. A trial court's jury instruction constitutes reversible error only where there is an abuse of discretion or an inaccurate statement of law. Commonwealth v. Jones, 542 Pa. 464, 668 A.2d 491 (1995). Jury instructions must be taken as a whole and an error cannot be predicated on an isolated excerpt. Commonwealth v. Zettlemoyer, 500 Pa. 16, 454 A.2d 937 (1982), cert. denied, 461 U.S. 970, 103 S.Ct. 2444, 77 L.Ed.2d 1327 (1983). Here, the trial court's jury instructions concerning unanimity were consistent with the procedures and instructions espoused by our legislature. Section 9711 of the Sentencing Code mandates that: [A]fter a verdict of murder of the first degree is recorded and before the jury is discharged, the court shall conduct a separate sentencing hearing in which the jury shall determine whether the defendant shall be sentenced to death or life imprisonment. 42 Pa.C.S. § 9711(a)(1). Further, prior to the jury's consideration of the sentencing verdict, the court must instruct the jury that: [T]he court may, in its discretion, discharge the jury if it is of the opinion that further deliberation will not result in a unanimous agreement as to the sentence, in which case the court shall sentence the defendant to life imprisonment. 42 Pa.C.S. § 9711(c)(1)(v). Thus, the sentencing code mandates that when the court determines that the jury cannot agree upon the verdict, the court must impose life imprisonment. A review of the record reveals that the trial court properly instructed the jury that the jury could return a less than unanimous verdict, and that the trial court would then be required by law to impose a sentence of life imprisonment. [41] The trial court's instruction was a proper statement of the law. Consequently, appellant is not entitled to relief on this claim.