Opinion ID: 1766302
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: was the juror selection correct?

Text: Under the majority opinion, this case is reversed because of the improper selection of one juror  Mr. Veech. The majority is absolutely correct in its analysis of that issue. I part company with the majority because numerous other jurors were approved who clearly should not have been. In addition, I find several other questionable practices in the overall selection of the jury panel. One is, as indicated above, the failure to allow any individual inquiries as to the veniremen's knowledge of the case. Appellant was unable to remove for cause, but was forced to exercise peremptory challenges, to eight persons who had a close relationship with the victim's family or with Kentucky State Prison employees. Since appellant was confined at the state prison, and the victim was a well-known, loved and valued employee of the prison, it was clearly error not to remove these persons for cause. The majority correctly states the law, when it held that whenever a trial court abuses its discretion in denying a challenge for cause, it is reversible error where the defendant exhausts all his peremptory challenges after electing to use a peremptory challenge to excuse the jurors. I will not belabor this opinion with an extensive discussion of each of the eight disputed challenges. A summary will suffice to show that the trial court seemed almost oblivious of his duty to see that a fair and impartial jury should be selected in this case. Mr. Henderson was a brother to one Kentucky State Penitentiary employee, and a brother-in-law to another. He conceded that he had some thoughts on what should be done to the person who killed the victim. Moreover, his stepfather (a former guard at Kentucky State Penitentiary) was held hostage by a prisoner and his grandfather was knifed by an inmate. He also stated that he did not like the fact that Grooms (a black man) had developed a crush on the white female victim. Ms. Baker reluctantly admitted not only that she knew the victim, but in fact, she had been a student of hers. John Choat's mother was a fellow employee of the victim at the prison. Mr. Patton's wife is the secretary of the warden of the prison. Furthermore, he had previously sat on a jury which convicted another defendant of murder. Mr. Trimm had served as a juror within the past year and implied he had feelings about the case. Ms. Buchanan's husband was superintendent at the Lyon County schools. She knew the victims son and had sympathy for him. She also did not approve of the appellant's affection for the victim for racial reasons. Mr. Mayes knew people who worked at the prison, and more importantly, said he would wonder why a defendant didn't testify on his own behalf. Mr. Veech was the other questioned juror, and he stated that he would automatically vote for the death penalty if he found appellant guilty. Taken individually, I cannot say that the trial court clearly abused its discretion. However, the overall conclusion that I have reached is that not excusing the jurors for cause is part of a cumulative set of circumstances which made it impossible for the defendant to receive a fair trial. It is the probability of bias or prejudice that is determinative in ruling on a challenge for cause. Pennington v. Commonwealth, Ky., 316 S.W.2d 221, 224 (1958). Moreover, I believe that the trial court erred in excusing 41 jurors, without notice. Nearly half of the panel was not available for this trial. According to the trial judge's own notes, eleven percent of those excused by the trial court were excused without good cause. KRS 29A.070. The picture one gets from a study of the entire record with respect to jury selection is that there is a fundamental lack of fairness in the selection process. Standing alone, one could argue that, technically speaking, there was not a clear abuse of discretion. However, when an accused's life is at stake, a special effort to insure a fair trial should be made. Because of my belief that the entire process of jury selection was unfair, I would also reverse on this ground.