Robinson relies on Mach v. Stewart, 137 F.3d 630 (9th Cir.1997), in support of a finding of prejudicial error. However, the bodies of the capital murder victims, Trouten and Lewicka, were discovered in Linn County. The evidence did not establish that Robinson actually ripped baby Tiffany from Lisa Stasi's arms. See Powell v. Commonwealth, 267 Va. 107, 144, 590 S.E.2d 537 (2004) (trial court did not err in refusing to allow defendant to voir dire jurors on subject of his prior conviction; jurors exposed to this information were not subject to automatic exclusion where defense counsel disclosed prior conviction; challenge barred by invited error doctrine). 3. Contrary to Robinson's assertion, the prosecutor did not ask the question to implicate Nancy Robinson in any criminal activity. Moreover, the members of defendant's jury were well qualified. Robinson also claims that Rundle's testimony was improper because there was not a sufficient connection between the tools and the defendant or the charges against him. At the end of her direct examination, prosecutor Welch asked Norman whether Sheila Faith had an interest in BDS & M, which resulted in the following exchange: [Prosecutor]: Now, maam, did you know if your sister Sheilaor are you aware that your sister, Sheila, had an interest in bondage and discipline and sadomasochistic sex? At Robinson's direction, Holmes told Overland Park detectives that she had recently babysat Tiffany and learned Stasi had left for Arkansas with a man named Bill Summers. He was discovered after a 2000 sexual assault arrest, according to ABC. 213439(a)(6) for the murders of the principal victims, Trouten in Count II and Lewicka in Count III, as one of multiple acts or transactions constituting parts of a common scheme or course of conduct in which other human beings were killed in a premeditated and intentional manner, to-wit: Beverly J. Bonner, Sheila Faith, Debbie Faith and Lisa Stasi. The jury convicted and sentenced Robinson to death on both counts. The Supreme Court has acknowledged that an adequate voir dire is essential to the realization of these due process protections. Robinson believes such questioning was necessary because those who would assign little to no weight to specific types of mitigation were unqualified to serve. 1853, 100 L.Ed.2d 372 (1988) (claims of vagueness under Eighth Amendment assert inadequate notice failing to limit a sentencer's discretion). Before the move to Johnson County, Carolyn Trouten observed her daughter researching overseas educational opportunities, and Trouten began filling out a passport application, a copy of which was seized during the search of Robinson's Olathe storage unit. On the other hand, it's probably not a good thing for us to get too speculative. The defense requested a curative instruction, but the district judge felt it would draw the jury's attention to the remark. Defendant did not challenge Juror 302 for cause. 60444. Juror misconduct is a broad label which has been used to describe communications with jurors from outsiders, witnesses, bailiffs, or judges; and actions by jurors in the unauthorized viewing of premises, or reading of newspaper articles. State v. Fenton, 228 Kan. 658, 664, 620 P.2d 813 (1980). Robinson also cites State v. Hall, 246 Kan. 728, 793 P.2d 737 (1990), overruled in part on other grounds by Ferguson v. State, 276 Kan. 428, 78 P.3d 40 (2003), in support of the same argument. The prosecutor asked Glines why she wanted Robinson to stop calling her, and she explained: He was wanting me to come back here and live with him, work for him and totally abandon, so to speakor never speak to any family again. 214624(e) that directed a penalty phase jury to impose the death sentence if aggravating circumstances found to exist were not outweighed by mitigating circumstances found to exist. [YOUNG]: As I said, it's not something that you would determine from an autopsy.. Nor was the comment motivated by ill will. However, without the original checks, there were legitimate proof problems in attempting to match the endorsements on the back of the checks. Here, the two separate theories of Trouten's taking could support but one conviction for aggravated kidnapping. at 2768 (Breyer, J., dissenting). Judge Anderson allowed defense counsel to ask prospective jurors if they would meaningfully consider certain types of mitigation, but he did not allow them to ask how much weight they would assign to such evidence. At the start of closing argument, prosecutor Morrison characterized Robinson's acts as sinister and provided examples of his conduct warranting the title. On March 17, 2000, Robinson, posing as Tom, responded to Taylor's e-mail, describing himself as a very aggressive and hard working businessman and outlining his ground rules for a BDS & M relationship. Moreover, this doctrine does not apply if no error or only one error supports reversal. She believed the relationship was different from Robinson's other affairs. After selecting the jury, Judge Anderson delivered admonitions and explained why jurors would be identified by number: Now, I want to explain to you a little bit about procedurally how we're going to handle things. Robinson argues Juror 39 should have been excused because she never said she could entirely ignore her previous knowledge of the case or presume defendant innocent. Both the district judge and the parties knew the identity of each prospective juror. 213439(a)(6). In analyzing the penalty phase proceedings, we presumed without holding that Juror 147's use of the Bible constituted juror misconduct. Did the prosecutor improperly attack defense counsel's argument?