California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Dyer, 246 Cal.Rptr. 209, 45 Cal.3d 26 (Cal. 1988):
The trial court is in a better position than this court to evaluate the responses of a prospective juror. It is common for a prospective juror to initially give equivocal answers and then, once questions are put that focus the issue and force the prospective juror to think about whether they could actually impose such a sentence, indicate that they will never vote for the death penalty. (See e.g., People v. Fields (1983) 35 Cal.3d 329, 353-357, 197 Cal.Rptr. 803, 673 P.2d 680; People v. Floyd (1970) 1 Cal.3d 694, 725, 83 Cal.Rptr. 608, 464 P.2d 64.) We find no error in the court's exclusion of prospective jurors who indicated they would not, under any circumstances, vote for the death penalty.
E. Constitutionality of the 1978 Death Penalty Law and Sentencing Scheme
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.