Lamar v. State

Citations

• 64 Miss. 687

Syllabus

<p>Criminal Practice. Intimidation of juror by district attorney and court. Effect on just verdict. '</p> <p>L. was on trial for an assault with intent to murder. The jury had been sworn and witnesses were being examined. The district attorney then, for the first time, was informed that A., one of the jurors, had been subpoenaed as a witness for the defendant, and that he had said before going on the jury that if he got on that jury he would hold it till hell froze over, or acquit defendant. He communicated this information to the court, and thereupon the judge announced his willingness to discharge the jury and order another trial, but the district attorney waived objection to the juror and the trial proceeded. On a subsequent day of the trial the juror, A., at the instance of the district attorney, was sworn as a witness. Counsel for the defendant objected to the examination of him, and by order of the court the jury withdrew from the .court-room. Then the examination of the witness proceeded. After several ineffectual questions as to witness having visited the accused and conspired to acquit him, the district attorney asked A. if he had ever made any such statement as set out above. This he denied. The jury were then brought in and told by the court that they had no concern in what liad taken place. The trial proceeded and the defendant was convicted. Held, that although the verdict was demanded by the evidence and the law, appellant’s conviction, by reason of the action of the court and district attorney in reference to the juror A., was not reached by a fair and impartial trial according to the requirements of law, and he is entitled to a new trial.</p>