 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
BUSH v. STATE12/1/1995
"Venireman Number 155 — Black Female — She answered the question No. 42, 'Capital punishment has not stopped crime so it only takes another person's life.' 'Do you think it deters crime?' 'No.' She checked 'Capital punishment has never been effective in preventing crime.'
"Venireman Number 201A — Black Female — She referred to capital punishment as being a 'Scapegoat.' Could not understand why she labeled it as a scapegoat. Her position on capital punishment was, therefore, questionable.
"Venireman Number 202 — . . . Black Female — Did not return written questionnaire.
"Venireman Number 205 — Black Male — In response to question # 42 he stated that he did not believe in the death penalty, he did not believe it prevented crime, and could not vote for it.
"Venireman Number 209 — Black Male — He had a criminal mischief third degree in 1980, a DUI, another DUI, another DUI, and refused to take a chemical test in 1990.
"Venireman Number 212 — Black Female — She said that she could not vote for the death penalty, and she did not answer any of the questions with respect to capital punishment.
"Venireman Number 272 — White Male — Attorney with Rushton, Stakely. Reluctant because of connection to law firm.
"Venireman Number 220 — White Female — Opposed to the death penalty — did not believe in taking a life, possibly could do it — was equivocal on the death penalty — religious beliefs would hinder.
"Venireman Number 222 — Black Female — Stated that she was not for the death penalty — did not answer questions on the questionnaire with regard to the death penalty.
"Venireman Number 118 — White Female — Had some question as to the death penalty — stated in response to question as to her opinion about the death penalty, 'I do not support' — answered that the death penalty did not deter crime.
"Venireman Number 84 — Black Female — Equivocal with regard to the death penalty — stated in one place on the questionnaire that she was for capital punishment
but did not feel capital punishment to be a deterrent — then later in responding on the questionnaire she stated that capital punishment was a definite deterrent — would state one thing then turn around and state something else — District Attorney stated that he could not determine how she really felt about capital punishment — that she was struck due to questions on the questionnaire and demeanor.
"Venireman Number 108 — White Male — Had reservations about capital punishment — could weigh death as opposed to life without parole, and tended toward life without parole — mentioned about the rehabilitating nature of defendants.
"Venireman Number 82 — White Female — Stated during colloquy with the Court that she was prone to vote for life without parole — that maybe under premeditated circumstances she could go for capital punishment, but very reluctant — capital punishment to be used only as a last resort — equivocal as to whether she could vote for capital punishment — did not check other questions."
The appellant contends that the prosecutor used each of his peremptory strikes against black venirepersons in violation of Batson. On appeal, he specifically contests the explanations offered by the prosecutor, and accepted by the trial court, for striking venirepersons L.M. (130), T.M. (136), L.M. (143), E.H. (84), W.T. (209), M.W. (75A), E.V. (212), P.C. (35), G.R. (188A), and K.T. (201A). He also points out the prosecutor's failure to give any reason for his striking D.T. (202). The only specific objection raised in the trial court to the prosecutor's explanation for striking a venireperson was to
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 Alabama DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|