Opinion ID: 1280915
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 7

Heading: mr hurt

Text: Mr. Hurt stated that he was inclined to vote for the death penalty for the more culpable forms of murder and that he personally believed in an eye for an eye. However, he also consistently indicated that he could vote for any of the three sentencing options. Although Mr. Hurt stated he would be more likely to impose the death penalty if the killing was senseless and there was intent to kill, his leaning toward a death sentence under specific circumstances does not necessarily mandate his disqualification. See Crowe v. State, supra at 588(9)(a), 458 S.E.2d 799. Consideration of the entirety of Mr. Hurt's voir dire authorized the trial court to find that he would set aside any personal beliefs and that he was, therefore, qualified to serve as a juror. Compare Pope v. State, supra.