? Are people who oppose death penalty excused from juries

[WI_DEM]

which deal with capital cases? Just curious. For instance, in my case I could probably have agreed with the jury and found Scott Peterson guilty, but I probably would have voted against the death penalty based on my personal belief. Do jury members need to make their views on the death penalty known before hand?

[GumboYaYa]

1. Yes.

People who oppose the death penalty usually do not make it on the jury in a capital case. In some states it is an automatic disqualifier.

It's kind of sick that in America you are too humane to be on a jury of your peers.

[vi5]

2. I believe that is the case.....

Not sure though.

[Worst Username Ever]

3. During jury selection

the prosecutor/defender get to interview jurors, and are allowed to toss a couple out for whatever reason they feel. They then bargain with the other lawyer to keep/throw out a few others, and there is your jury. If the prosecutor is persuing a death penalty verdict, it is possible that they will use their discretion to throw out anyone opposed to it, and then may bargain away the others.

[patdem]

4. Yes, in dealth penalty cases they ask jurors if they are against the death

pentaly...and if they are they cannot serve on the jury.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

5. Yes, they ask you if you would be willing to impose the death sentence

I always wonder what I would do if asked this. If I lied, I could possibly save a life. However, it would be lying.

[demosincebirth]

6. You can serve on any jury if you believe the the death penalty or not.

Its up to the prosecuter in allowing you to serve.

[Booster]

7. Normally, during the questioning of the jurors by the defense

attorney and the prosecution, if you say you are against the death penalty the prosecutor would most likely excuse you, but it's not an automatic excuse to get out of a trial, just unlikely you'd be picked.

[Jersey Devil]

12. Prosecutors are very hesitant to do that

because it can open up an avenue for appeal if they systematically knock off jurors who are against the death penalty (as long as they say they can do their legal duty and impose death if required to so so under the law). They generally refrain from doing it.

[Jersey Devil]

8. No, they are not automatically excluded

If someone tells the court they do not personally believe in capital punishment but that they could still do their duty as a juror under the law and render a death penalty if the facts and law required it they would remain on the jury. Only those who say that they could not follow the law since it conflicts with their personal views would be automaticially excused.

[Kingshakabobo]

9. I believe the prosecutor can disqualify you based on your

opposition to the death penalty. Asking you about your opposition is a legitimate question according to case law. I forget the term they use for a fully vetted jury. "death penalty ready"????

Note: I'm not an attorney but I do watch Matlock.

[Jersey Devil]

10. A juror who is against the death penalty cannot be challenged for cause

as long as he states he will follow the law and impose a death penalty if required by the law despite his personal opinion.

The Prosecutor (and the defense) does, however, have a number of peremptory challenges which allows him to knock a juror off the panel for no reason at all.

[Kingshakabobo]

15. I would think being against would be enough "cause".

I guess it depends on how "against" you are. I'm thinking of someone "against" for religious or moral reasons and wouldn't vote for the death penalty "no way, no how" and would answer no to the question of being able to follow the "law". I don't think the prosecutor would have to blow a peremptory challenge on this person.


"as long as he states he will follow the law and impose a death penalty if required by the law despite his personal opinion."

on edit: I'm talking about a capitol murder case only.

[Jersey Devil]

16. That's correct, you have it right

You can be against the death penalty but if on further questioning the judge determines that you will follow the law as he charges it to you a challenge for cause would not be upheld and the juror would remain.

I'm not sure I understand your second comment since being for or against capital punishment would of course only be relevant in a capital murder case. Otherwise you wouldn't be asked about it.

[Kingshakabobo]

17. I guess I was referring to some earlier posts as well

because some people seem to be discussing getting out of jury duty in ALL cases as if it would be an excuse/reason not to serve.

:)

I'll have to ask my buddy the Public defender about his opinions. He had a case last year in Chicago where some 16?? year old kid killed a father of 2 at a cab-stand. Last I talked to him, he was trying to get the kid off with juvenile hall till he was 21. I have a hard time with anyone who points a gun in a crime let alone uses one.

I'm against the death penalty but I sure wont be going to any candle light vigils for Peterson or any other murderer.

[lawdave]

18. Relevant Case Law

Here's the relevant case law for "death-qualifying" and "life-qualifying" juries:

Witherspoon v. IL (1958)- Supreme Court's first major death penalty case. Judge dismissed everyone who had any type of scruple. Supreme Court overturned and said that anyone who would consider the death penalty could be allowed. This is a VERY high threshold for the prosecution to prove

Wainwright v. Witt- lowers threshold. Jurors must be able to abide by oath to apply the law. So as long as you can apply the death penalty based on the law and not be substantially impaired by your beliefs you can serve. But here's an important kicker: the Court gives deference to the trial judge in his decision to allow prosecution to strike for cause.

Morgan v. IL- petitioner challenges whether they can "life-challenge" the jury. Supreme Court rules that during voir dire on death penalty cases, defense can question whether jurors would give death penalty in all cases. Basically forces jurors to give some type of consideration to mitigating factors.

So that's where we currently stand...

[Jersey Devil]

19. A little different in NJ to this extent - only the judge voir dires

the jury. The defense and prosecution can submit written questions it wants the judge to ask prospective jurors and it is up to him whether to ask them or not. Otherwise only the judge speaks to the jury and there are absolutely no direct questions by the lawyers.

[dbfl33040]

11. priest

Yep, but only in death penalty cases. For instance, everybody on the Peterson jury said during voir dire that each of them could vote for the death penalty. One juror said he was a strict Catholic and had to ask his priest (no kidding). I guess the priest said OK because he's one of the jurors who just sentenced Peterson to death!

[Endangered Specie]

13. Id say there is good chance you could stay on...

I mean, if saying you are against CP, that would be a rather easy way for nearly everyone to get off Jury Duty. They will probably question you further to see if you are serious about it. If they believe you, the prosecution might use on of their freebies to toss you. However they can keep you on bc by law if all the criteria for a DP sentence meet you must vote for it, regardless of personal feeling.

[progressiveBadger]

14. A couple of months ago, I was a prospective juror for a murder trial

They made it clear during selection that the death penalty would not be sought, but they asked many questions that removed people of bias in either direction.
But they really try to keep as many choices as possible. They don't let you go automatically just because you say you are against the death penalty.