McDaniel v. Commonwealth, 2011 Ky. LEXIS 95

Appellant Nathan McDaniel, Jr. was convicted of murder arising from Gerald Sizemore's beating death (Aug. 18–19, 2007) in Clay County, Kentucky.
Eugene Sizemore pleaded guilty and testified against McDaniel; Johnny and Michael Sizemore were also tried and convicted of murder.
Trial court failed to strike two jurors for cause, forcing defense to use peremptory strikes on jurors who were equivocal about being fair.
Two jurors (S.W. and A.W.) had personal connections to victims and expressed uncertainty about impartiality; the court overruled strikes for cause.
Prosecution introduced evidence including a bleach bottle photograph; testimony suggested cleanup effort, though McDaniel did not handle bleach.
The court admitted additional evidentiary items (hearsay by a police chief, autopsy photos) and allowed cross-examination limits on a witness.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether trial court erred by not striking for-cause jurors	McDaniel asserts jurors S.W. and A.W. were unable to be impartial.	Commonwealth contends jurors showed potential bias but could be impartial with proper voir dire.	Abuse of discretion; failure to strike equivocal jurors requires reversal.
KRE 404(b) evidence—bleach bottle photograph	Photograph of bleach bottle was irrelevant and prejudicial against McDaniel.	Photo aided understanding motive of co-conspirators and was probative.	Not 404(b) evidence; not unduly prejudicial; admissible for motive/context.
Hearsay testimony by Chief Culver	Culver's hearsay about statements by Eugene Sizemore should have been excluded.	Testimony explained police action; integral to case	Error admitted; overruled objections; prejudicial where not linked to issue.
Admission of autopsy photographs	Autopsy photos were prejudicial and unreviewable absent record.	No detailed record; relevance to causation and victim’s injuries.	Record insufficient to assess prejudice; presumed supportive of trial court ruling.
Cross-examination of Eric Schott	Defense should examine the specifics of Schott's robbery conviction.	KRE 609 prohibits detailing the nature of the conviction after admitting it; cross-exam was thorough.	No abuse of discretion; cross-examination properly limited by rule.

Paulley v. Commonwealth, 323 S.W.3d 715 (Ky. 2010) (equivocation on ability to be fair requires reversal)
Shane v. Commonwealth, 243 S.W.3d 336 (Ky. 2008) (no magic words; equivocation not sufficient)
Adkins v. Commonwealth, 96 S.W.3d 779 (Ky. 2003) (trial court's discretion on strike for cause; impartiality focused on demeanor)
Pendleton v. Commonwealth, 83 S.W.3d 522 (Ky. 2002) (juror impartiality and voir dire standards)
United States v. Wood, 299 U.S. 123 (1936) (impartiality can be shown by state of mind, not just answers)