Jurors cannot be excluded from death penalty trials because they have mixed views about capital punishment, the California Supreme Court has ruled.
The court voted unanimously that a prospective juror was improperly dismissed because of her conflicting views in a written questionnaire on the death penalty.
In its ruling July 16, the high court upheld John Riccardi’s murder conviction. It will be up to the California attorney general to decide whether to hold another penalty trial, or whether he will be sentenced to life imprisonment without the possibility of parole.
A similar juror issue is raised in several other Death Row inmates’ appeals, including Scott Peterson.
In 1984, a narrowly divided U.S. Supreme Court ruled that reversal of the death penalty is automatic when potential jurors are dismissed because of their written answers to questions about their views on capital punishment.
“I’m afraid I could not feel right in imposing the death penalty on someone even though I feel it is necessary under some circumstances,” the prospective juror wrote.
Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye wrote that the trial court judge should have questioned her more instead of dismissing her. The ruling “compels the reversal of the penalty phase without any inquiry as to whether the error actually” led to an unfair trial. She wrote a separate opinion to urge the U.S. Supreme Court to reconsider the automatic reversal in such cases.
Cliff Garner, Peterson’s attorney, argued in his appeal that the mistake occurred in his trial and can be the basis of appeals of a few other Death Row inmates.
–Charles David Henry