State v. Jeremiah Johnson, 317 P.3d 164

On February 11, 2012, Johnson went to his ex-girlfriend Horvath and her roommate Diamond; after being told he was not welcome, he initially left but later forced entry and punched a guest, causing a broken nose, while Diamond intervened and was struck.
Johnson was charged with burglary and two misdemeanor assaults; he pled guilty to the assaults on July 17, 2012, and proceeded to a jury trial on the burglary charge.
During voir dire, Johnson’s counsel asked whether jurors would consider law enforcement officers more believable; Juror Harbaugh was dismissed for asserting officers are more believable, and Juror Harsell was questioned further.
The district court denied Johnson’s motion to excuse Harsell for cause, leading Johnson to use his final peremptory challenge against Harsell and proceed with a jury including Harsell.
Johnson was convicted of burglary and sentenced to ten years with three years suspended on the burglary count and six months on the assaults; he appeals the denial of the challenge for cause.
The issue on appeal is whether the district court abused its discretion in denying the motion to excuse Juror Harsell for cause.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Did the district court abuse its discretion denying a challenge for cause to Juror Harsell?	Johnson contends Harsell showed bias by favoring police	State argues Harsell could set aside bias and be impartial	No abuse; court affirmed district court’s decision

State v. Golie, 2006 MT 91 (2006 MT) (abuse of discretion when trial court fails to grant challenge for cause)
State v. Hausauer, 2006 MT 336 (2006 MT) (juror state-of-mind analysis under § 46-16-115(2)(j), MCA)
State v. Marble, 2005 MT 208 (2005 MT) (prejudice and fixed opinions evaluated under state-of-mind grounds)
State v. Falls Down, 2003 MT 300 (2003 MT) (fixed opinions about guilt insufficient without ability to follow instructions)
State v. Rogers, 2007 MT 227 (2007 MT) (juror bias considerations and impartiality based on voir dire)
State v. Heath, 2004 MT 58 (2004 MT) (rehabilitation of juror statements during voir dire; setting aside experiences)
State v. Robinson, 2008 MT 34 (2008 MT) (deference to district court on challenges for cause)
State v. Gunderson, 2010 MT 166 (2010 MT) (expansion of permissible considerations in voir dire)
State v. Braunreiter, 2008 MT 197 (2008 MT) (open-ended questioning to clarify; not coercive rehabilitation)