Armendares v. State

Citations

• 10 Tex. Ct. App. 44

Syllabus

<p>1. Jury Law.—■ Only such persons as under our Constitution and laws are qualified voters in the State and county are competent to serve on juries in this State.</p> <p>2. SAME'—New Trial.— Several jurors having answered on voir dire that they were citizens of this State, they were accepted and impaneled. After trial and conviction it was discovered that they were in fact citizens of Mexico, whereupon the accused moved for a new trial, and set up their non-qualification as cause. Held, that the court erred in refusing to grant a new trial.</p> <p>3. Same — Practice.—Proposed jurors having qualified themselves on voir dire, the accused is not required to presume them guilty of perjury, and extend his investigation. See the opinion for state of facts which will avoid the stringent application of the rule laid down in Roséborough v. The State, 43 Texas, 570; O'Meally v. The State, 1 Texas Ct. App. 180, and Lester v. The State, 2 Texas Ct. App. 423.</p> <p>4. Charge oe the Court.—Note suggestions to trial judges of the danger of invading the powers of the jury by transcending in then- charges the language of the Code respecting the relations of the jury to the evidence adduced.</p>