Klyce v. State

Citations

• 79 Miss. 652

Syllabus

<p>1. Cbiminal Law. Jwror. Competency. Opinion. Constitution 1890, sec. 26. Code 1982, <¡2355.</p> <p>A venireman who testifies on his voir dire that he had heard witnesses for the state talk about the case, and believes what they told him, and has formed and expressed an opinion, which he still retains, and which, he supposes, would require testimony to remove, is incompetent as a juror, under the constitution of 1890, sec. 26, guaranteeing- a trial by an impartial jury, although he further testify that what he had heard will not prevent him from rendering .a fair and impartial verdict; and such a venireman is not within code 1892, § 2355, providing that any person, otherwise competent, who will make oath that he is impartial, shall be competent as a juror in a crimnal case, though he has an impression or opinion as to the guilt of the accused, if he has no bias or prejudice, and no desire to reach any result except that to which the evidence may conduct.</p> <p>2. Same. Peremptory, challenges. Appeal.</p> <p>A defendant, who at the trial exhausted his peremptory challenges, may, on appeal, predicate error of the action of the court below in wrongfully denying his challenge for cause of a proffered juror whom he afterwards peremptorily challenged.</p>