Opinion ID: 1060577
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 13

Heading: jury pool questionnaire

Text: The defendant contends that the trial court erred by denying his motion requesting permission to distribute a jury questionnaire to the jury pool in advance of voir dire proceedings. We respectfully disagree. Prior to trial, the defendant filed a Motion to Order Administration of a Juror Questionnaire. The attached questionnaire contained 79 questions to be completed by potential jurors. It appears that after a hearing on the matter, the trial court denied the motion; however, a transcript of the hearing is not included in the record. The goal of voir dire is to ensure that jurors are competent, unbiased, and impartial, and the decision of how to conduct voir dire of prospective jurors rests within the sound discretion of the trial court. State v. Howell, 868 S.W.2d 238, 247 (Tenn.1993); see generally State v. Harris, 839 S.W.2d 54, 65 (Tenn.1992). In the present case, the defendant does not allege that the jurors who served on his case were incompetent, biased, or partial. Moreover, the record does not reflect that the trial court abused its discretion by denying the defendant's request to use the jury questionnaire. See State v. Stephenson, 878 S.W.2d 530, 540 (Tenn.1994) (trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying defendant's pre-trial motion to disseminate a detailed questionnaire to prospective jurors); State v. Smith, 857 S.W.2d 1, 20 (Tenn.1993) (defendant failed to show prejudice as a result of denial of a motion to submit proposed questionnaire to prospective jurors prior to voir dire ). Accordingly, we find that this argument is without merit.