Opinion ID: 2444929
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Scott's Fourth Claim

Text: Scott's fourth claim is that his counsel was ineffective for failing to insist on a voir dire examination of a juror after the juror informed the court that she was taking pain medication. Scott argues that because most prescription pain relievers contain narcotics, the juror was impaired and preoccupied with her pain during the trial and, therefore, could not be fair and impartial. This claim also fails. The juror was questioned about her medical issue, and told the trial judge that it would not interfere with performing her duty as a juror. [32] The judge, defense counsel, and counsel for the State were sufficiently satisfied to allow the juror to continue to serve. Because Scott's contention that his counsel performed deficiently or that he was actually prejudiced lacks merit, the trial court did not err or abuse its discretion by denying Scott's claim.