The trial court may properly exclude prospective jurors who indicate that they could not vote to impose the death penalty under any circumstances.. See State v. Trujillo, 99 N.M. 251, 252, 657 P.2d 107, 108 (1983). {8} Additionally, Clark objected to the trial court’s decision to strike Churchill from the jury, as he stated that he leaned towards voting for a life sentence, and Clark asserts that Churchill would have been willing to listen to and consider the ease. The State argues that Churchill said that he had “a great reluctance” to vote for capital punishment, that he leaned strongly towards a life sentence, and that he requested that he not be picked for the jury. The trial court characterized this decision as its most difficult, and, based upon Churchill’s demea 28 (1989) (<HOLDING>). {10} The trial court may properly exclude a
holding that the trial court did not err in denying a plea in abatement on grounds that individuals owning the balance of the working interest were not necessary parties holding that the trial court did not err under either the federal or north carolina constitutions by allowing the state to exercise peremptory challenges to remove potential jurors based on their qualms regarding capital punishment holding that the trial court did not err in finding that jurors were qualified to serve despite the defendants challenges on revers ewitherspoon grounds holding that the trial court did not err by granting defendants motion for summary judgment holding that trial court did not err