Monday, July 14, 2008

XIII. Defendant's Claim that a "Death Qualified Jury" Deprives Him of a Fair Trial

78. Denied.

79. Denied. In Commonwealth. v. Paolello, 665 A.2d 439, 542 Pa. 47 (Pa., 1995), the court wrote, "This Court has repeatedly stated that the purpose of voir dire is to ensure the empanelling of a fair and impartial jury capable of following the instructions on the law as provided by the trial court. Commonwealth v. Jermyn, 533 Pa. 194, 620 A.2e 1128 (1993), cert. denied, Jermyn v. Pennsylvania, 510 U.S. 1049, 114 S.Ct. 703, 12E L.Ed.2d 669 (1994), (reaffirming Commonwealth v. Jermyn, 516 Pa. 460, 533 A.2d 74 (1987), cert. denied, Jermyn v. Pennsylvania, 510 U.S. 1049,114 S.Ct. 703,126 L.Ed.2d 669 (1994)). The selection of jurors who assert their ability to follow the law and impose the death penalty when the law so requires, does not mean that the jurors are prone to death as asserted. This argument has repeatedly been rejected by this Court. Commonwealth v. Blount, 538 Pa. 156,647 A.2d 199 (1994)".

80. Denied. The Commonwealth has not been provided this social science evidence and believes the Defendant has little more than anecdotal evidence.

81. Denied. Again, the Commonwealth requests an offer of proof.

82. Denied. See Commonwealth. v. Paolello, 665 A.2d 439,542 Pa. 47 (Pa., 1995)

WHEREFORE, the Commonwealth requests this Honorable Court to deny this Motion.