6.Ruling on Proposed Penalty-Phase Opening Argument
10 linesBOYD YOUNG: During my opening, I would intend to tell the jurors that if one Juror decided that life was the appropriate punishment, then the punishment would, in fact, be life and the case would be over.
THE COURT: Consistent with my ruling, I have ruled consistent on that. I think that is against case law, what you are saying. I understand why you want to say.
BOYD YOUNG: It is the law.
RICK HUBBARD: Not in America.
BOYD YOUNG: In South Carolina, right here in Lexington County. It is the law.
THE COURT: We will put that on the record.
BOYD YOUNG: We can do it in the morning.
THE COURT: Let's put it right now while Joy is fresh on it. I have ruled on it so he is just going to repeat it and I will rule again. He wants to say in his opening--
BOYD YOUNG: During my opening I would intend to tell the jurors that if one Juror decided that life was the appropriate punishment then the punishment would, in fact, be life and the case would be over.
THE COURT: And the Court is telling him not to argue that. At closing, the Court will give a consistent instruction used during jury qualifications, that a Juror cannot be coerced into abandoning their moral position, whatever that language was. I'm going to stick consistent with that language that we -- I used during Juror qualifications. All right. See y'all in the morning. We will start at 9:00. (Whereupon, the trial will resume the next morning at 9:00 a.m.)