Larry Jermaine Bell v. Commonwealth of Virginia, 1765162

Larry Jermaine Bell was convicted by a jury of distributing cocaine (third or subsequent offense) following a controlled buy by informant Donna Morris on April 20, 2015.
Officer Thomas Lewis, the case agent, assisted the informant and was a Commonwealth witness at trial.
During voir dire, prospective Juror E.L. disclosed a family relationship to Officer Lewis (Lewis’s father is E.L.’s first cousin) and initially said that would affect his ability to be fair.
Juror E.L. later gave equivocal answers indicating he might side with a law‑enforcement witness in a word‑against‑word situation, but also said he could listen with an open mind and decide on evidence.
The trial court denied the defense motion to strike Juror E.L. for cause; the defense used a peremptory strike to remove him. Juror E.L. did not serve on the jury.
On appeal the Court of Appeals of Virginia held the trial court abused its discretion by not striking Juror E.L. for cause and reversed and remanded for a new trial.

Issue	Bell's Argument	Commonwealth's Argument	Held
Whether the trial court erred in refusing to strike for cause a venireman related to a Commonwealth witness	Juror E.L.’s initial statements showed prejudice and he could not be rehabilitated; thus he should have been struck for cause	Juror could be rehabilitated and his relationship did not require per se dismissal; any error was harmless because Lewis’s credibility was not central	Court held the court erred to deny the challenge for cause; rehabilitation was insufficient and the error was not harmless — reversed and remanded

Breeden v. Commonwealth, 217 Va. 297 (establishes that any reasonable doubt about a juror’s qualifications must be resolved for the accused and that forcing use of peremptories to remove a biased venireman is prejudicial)
Gosling v. Commonwealth, 7 Va. App. 642 (a juror’s rehabilitative statements must come from the juror without leading; prior unequivocal bias cannot be cured by mere assent)
Lilly v. Commonwealth, 255 Va. 558 (relationship to a police officer witness is not per se disqualifying if the juror can set aside the relationship and be fair)
Griffin v. Commonwealth, 19 Va. App. 619 (mere acquiescence to the court’s questions does not rehabilitate a juror who first showed prejudice)
Spencer v. Commonwealth, 238 Va. 295 (voir dire must be viewed in its entirety; subsequent answers do not automatically erase initial expressions of bias)