Murder jury selected after one-on-one questioning

Friday, March 4, 2005 | 9:32 a.m.

District Judge Lee Gates, in the desire to ensure that a man accused of killing his sister and grandparents gets a fair trial, is taking the unusual step of going through the jury pool one person at a time while the rest of the jury waits outside the courtroom.

Gates made the unusual switch to that painstaking process after a prospective juror on Tuesday announced during questioning in front of other potential jurors that his police officer friend told him the evidence against 21-year-old Dante Pattison was overwhelming.

Pattison is accused of shooting his sister, Carrie Adric-Pattison, 32, and their grandparents, Yoshio Kato, 82, and Sally Kato, 75, on Feb. 24, 2001.

After three atypically long days of questioning, a jury was selected at 6:20 p.m. on Thursday.

Some grumbles were heard from prospective jurors lining the second floor hallway of District Court for three days, but Pattison's defense attorneys said all juries in death penalty cases should be selected this way.

"When there is a choice of life and death to be made, I think jury selection is a very important part of the process," Charles Cano said. "We need to get the jurors that can be as fair and unbiased as possible.

By questioning them one by one, you're liable to get the most truthful and honest responses because there is no peer pressure from others in the court."

Clark County Public Defender Phil Kohn said the Nevada Legislature should make one-by-one questioning of potential jurors mandatory in all death penalty cases "because we are asking people about the most basic of human questions, that of life and death."

"They (prospective jurors) are asked to discuss their morals, things like religion, very personal questions," Kohn said. "Judges often loathe to do it (one-by-one questioning of the jury pool), but most people aren't comfortable sharing such personal things in front of 80 people."

Kohn said when in a larger group "if someone wants out (of the jury) they learn right away how to get out" based on the answers given by others who are excused.

Deputy Public Defender Will Ewing, who is defending Pattison with Cano, said in California the jury selection for all death penalty cases is handled in the manner Gates has employed with the Pattison case.

Although implementing "individual voir dire," as it is called, is an option in most states, it was unclear Thursday as to how many states require the method for death penalty cases.

Chief Deputy District Attorney Marc DiGiacomo refused to comment on the jury selection process Thursday. The district attorney's office has a policy of not discussing any facet of an ongoing case.

What makes Pattison's case even more unusual is he is arguing insanity as his defense. During jury selection the court instructs all prospective jurors that the burden of proof at trial rests squarely on the shoulders of the prosecutors.

In arguing the insanity defense, however, Ewing and Cano will have the burden to prove Pattison is insane and that he is not guilty of murder because of his insanity.

Not guilty by reason of insanity is a rarely used plea that was reinstated during the 2003 Legislature. The Legislature had abolished the plea in 1995, but in 2001 the Nevada Supreme Court ruled the ban violated the due process rights of defendants.