that Rosales expressed repeatedly that he had not made up his mind and would have to hear all of the evidence before he would make a decision. Scullion stated that he would consider both options after hearing all of the evidence, although he tended towards the death penalty, characterized as a six to seven on a scale of ten. Clark notes that Redford stated that the defense would have more difficulty in convincing him to vote for a life sentence because the victim was a child. Redford stated that he could consider both aggravating and mitigating circumstances, but noted that he had two daughters, and said that crimes against children are worse than crimes against adults. We conclude that the trial court did not abuse its discretion. See McGuire, 110 N.M. at 312, 795 P.2d at 1004 (<HOLDING>); Stamper v. Muncie, 944 F.2d 170, 177 (4th
holding that trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying motion to continue due to pretrial publicity in part because court instructed jury on three separate occasions to consider only evidence presented in the courtroom holding that the district court should have engaged in a more detailed inquiry when pretrial publicity was vast a third of potential jurors had an opinion about the guilt of the defendant and all jurors selected had been exposed to pretrial publicity holding that trial court did not abuse its discretion in excusing a juror for cause holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to strike for cause two potential jurors who had heard andor read about the case but indicated that they could render a fair and impartial verdict based on the evidence presented holding that trial court did not abuse its discretion by denying the defendants motions to dismiss jurors for cause when they all proclaimed that they could be impartial even though one juror admitted to a leaning towards a guilty verdict based upon pretrial publicity