This enumeration is without merit. Witherspoon v. Illinois, 391 U.S. 510, 520 ( 88 S.C. 1770, 20 L.Ed.2d 776); Whisman v. State, 224 Ga. 793 ( 164 S.E.2d 719); Eberheart v. State, 232 Ga. 247, 250 ( 206 S.E.2d 12), and cases cited. 6. Defendant enumerates as error the court's permitting the state's chief investigator on this case to testify because he had heard the testimony of other witnesses, not having been sequestered.
Under Witherspoon v. Illinois, 391 U.S. 510 ( 88 S.C. 1770, 20 L.Ed.2d 776), it was not error to dismiss these jurors. Whisman v. State, 224 Ga. 793 ( 164 S.E.2d 719); Johnson v. State, 226 Ga. 511 ( 175 S.E.2d 840); Henderson v. State, 227 Ga. 68 ( 179 S.E.2d 76); Hart v. State, 227 Ga. 171 ( 179 S.E.2d 346); Pass v. State, 227 Ga. 730 ( 182 S.E.2d 779). There is no merit in enumerations of error b, c, and d, all of which involve the same issue of disqualification.
By their answers to questions propounded by the court and the district attorney, the excluded jurors made it clear that they would under no circumstances imaginable impose capital punishment. Under Witherspoon v. Illinois, 391 U.S. 510 ( 88 S.C. 1770, 20 L.Ed.2d 776); Whisman v. State, 224 Ga. 793 ( 164 S.E.2d 719); Johnson v. State, 226 Ga. 511 (1) ( 175 S.E.2d 840); and Hart v. State, 227 Ga. 171, 176 ( 179 S.E.2d 346) the jurors were disqualified to sit as jurors in the trial of this case. There is no merit in this enumeration of error.
Their exclusion by the trial court was clearly authorized by the ruling in Witherspoon v. Illinois, 391 U.S. 510 ( 88 S.C. 1770, 20 L.Ed.2d 776). See Whisman v. State, 224 Ga. 793 ( 164 S.E.2d 719), and Walker v. State, 226 Ga. 292 (1) ( 174 S.E.2d 440). This ground of enumerated error is without merit.
Their answers make it unmistakably clear that they would automatically vote against the imposition of capital punishment without regard to any evidence that might be developed in the case. Under Witherspoon v. Illinois, 391 U.S. 510 ( 88 S.C. 1770, 20 L.Ed.2d 776); and Whisman v. State, 224 Ga. 793 ( 164 S.E.2d 719), the jurors were disqualified to sit as jurors in the trial of the case. There is no merit in enumerations of error 1, 2, and 3, all of which involve the question of disqualification because each juror could not impose the death sentence under any circumstances.
1. "Under Witherspoon v. Illinois, 391 U.S. 510 ( 88 S.C. 1770, 20 L.Ed.2d 776) the trial court did not err in excluding for cause those prospective jurors who unmistakably answered that their reservations toward capital punishment were such that they would never vote to impose the death penalty regardless of the facts in the case. Whisman v. State, 224 Ga. 793 ( 164 S.E.2d 719); Hakala v. State, 225 Ga. 629 (1) ( 170 S.E.2d 406). Cf. Miller v. State, 224 Ga. 627, 636 ( 163 S.E.2d 730).
Under Witherspoon v. Illinois, 391 U.S. 510 ( 88 S.C. 1770, 20 L.Ed.2d 776), the trial court did not err in excluding for cause those prospective jurors who unmistakably expressed the view that their feelings toward capital punishment were such that they would never vote to impose the death penalty regardless of the facts of the case. Whisman v. State, 224 Ga. 793 ( 164 S.E.2d 719); Jackson v. State, 225 Ga. 790 (3) ( 171 S.E.2d 501). The term "feeling," as used by the court, referred to and was synonymous with the jurors' attitudes toward capital punishment, rather than indicating that they merely felt, rather than knew, that they would never vote to impose the death penalty regardless of the facts of the case, as is contended under enumerated error 6.
Appellant's counsel further requested the court for permission to ask the two additional questions allowed under Witherspoon v. Illinois, 391 U.S. 510 ( 88 S.C. 1770, 20 L.Ed.2d 776). Whisman v. State, 224 Ga. 793 ( 164 S.E.2d 719). The court ruled that counsel for the appellant could not further examine the jurors.
Under Witherspoon v. Illinois, 391 U.S. 510 ( 88 S.C. 1770, 20 L.Ed.2d 776) the trial court did not err in excluding for cause those prospective jurors who unmistakably answered that their reservations toward capital punishment were such that they would never vote to impose the death penalty regardless of the facts in the case. Whisman v. State, 224 Ga. 793 ( 164 S.E.2d 719); Hakala v. State, 225 Ga. 629 (1) ( 170 S.E.2d 406). Cf. Miller v. State, 224 Ga. 627, 636 ( 163 S.E.2d 730).
" The transcript does not quote the answer, but notes that the court received an affirmative answer from the juror to the question. See Whisman v. State, 224 Ga. 793 ( 164 S.E.2d 719), where this court, in a full bench decision, held that under Witherspoon v. Illinois, 391 U.S. 510 ( 88 S.C. 1770, 20 L.Ed.2d 776), it was not error to exclude the prospective juror where he answered that regardless of the facts, he would never vote to impose the death penalty. 2.