Calif. high court won't consider Peterson appeals
From Rusty Dornin
CNN
 |  Scott Peterson faces a possible death sentence. |
| |
|  VIDEO |
 The sentencing phase in the Scott Peterson murder trial is expected to produce emotional testimony.
|
|
(CNN) -- The California Supreme Court on Monday declined to consider an appeal by convicted murderer Scott Peterson seeking a new jury and venue change for the penalty phase of his trial.
The motions previously were denied by Peterson's trial judge and by the state 1st District Court of Appeals.
Arguments begin Tuesday in the trial's penalty phase in which the same jury will decide whether Peterson should get the death penalty or life in prison without parole.
After 184 witnesses testified over 23 weeks, Peterson was convicted November 12 of first-degree murder with special circumstances in the death of his wife, Laci, and of second-degree murder in the death of their unborn son.
Their bodies turned up on the shore of San Francisco Bay in April 2003, almost four months after Laci Peterson, who was nearly nine months pregnant, disappeared from the couple's home in Modesto.
The case was moved from Modesto, where authorities believe the murders occurred, to Redwood City after a judge concluded that an impartial jury could not be seated in the couple's hometown.
Peterson's lead attorney, Mark Geragos, argued that the penalty phase should be moved out of Redwood City because of what he claimed was the community's animosity toward his client.
Geragos also said that the departure of two jurors during deliberations had compromised the jury's ability to render a fair verdict.
The 1st District Court of Appeals rejected Geragos' emergency request last Tuesday. The trial judge, Alfred Delucchi, denied the motion the day before. (Full story)
Geragos said "massive media interest in and community fervor" about the case had polluted the panel.
"That the jury was in fact influenced by such extrinsic factors was demonstrated by the comments of Juror Number 5, before his dismissal ... to the effect that 'given what's transpired' in the jury room, he feared that his ability to weigh the evidence fairly and openly had been so compromised 'that I would never know personally whether or not I was giving the community's verdict, the popular verdict, the expected verdict,' " according to court papers filed November 17.
In documents it filed opposing the defense requests, the prosecution countered that when asked to explain his comments, the juror "completely retracted his claim."
"What is of even more significance is that at the time the [juror] made his statements in a repeated attempt to get off the case, the jury had not yet taken a vote," the prosecution papers said.
During the second month of jury selection in Redwood City, Geragos unsuccessfully sought to move the trial to Los Angeles, arguing that an impartial jury could not be found in the San Francisco suburb about 70 miles from Modesto.
