State v. Kellogg
Citations
- 104 La. 580
Syllabus
<p>Syllabus.</p> <p>1. Every court has the power necessary to the exercise of the jurisdiction conferred upon it, and, in the absence of specific provisions of law upon the subject, may adopt such means as may be necessary for the correction of irregularities in the drawing of juries and such like matters.</p> <p>2. No special method is provided by law for the setting aside of the proceedings of a “jury commission” acting under the authority of Act 135 of 1898, in drawing a general venire, and, so far as the method is concerned, it is competent for the judge to set it aside by means of an order, made either in open court or in chambers and entered upon the minutes.</p> <p>3. Act 135 of 1898 differs from Act 44 of 1877, in that the former contemplates that all the members required by law to constitute the jury commission shall, at least, have been qualified before any official action is taken by the body as a whole.</p> <p>4. In any event, as the law contemplates that the jury commission shall consist of six persons, for a less number to act before the body had ever been completed by the appointment and qualification of another member is an irregularity which it is competent for the district judge to correct by setting aside the proceedings.</p> <p>5. A complaint that a person accused of crime was entitled to be tried by a jury selected from a venire drawn by a majority of the jury commission before the other members had qualified, when no fraud or specific injury is charged, is without merit.</p> <p>O. It is competent 1'or the trial judge to order talesmen from portions of the parish remote from the scene of the homicide, and the mere recital, in a b'H of exceptions, that there is antagonism between the two sections of the parish will not affect the validity of such order, when it is not made to appear in what way such antagonism will be prejudicial to the defendant in the matter of his trial.</p> <p>7. A juror, who, upon .his voir dire, says “I have been thinking,
Judges: Breaux, Decree, Monroe
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
11 cases in this archive cite this case.
- State v. VialSupreme Court of Louisiana· 1923-04-02· cited 23×
- State v. JuggerSupreme Court of Louisiana· 1950-04-24· cited 22×
- State v. HowardSupreme Court of Louisiana· 1907-11-18· cited 16×
- State v. LoveSupreme Court of Louisiana· 1901-11-15· cited 15×
- State v. McClendonSupreme Court of Louisiana· 1907-04-01· cited 15×
- State v. ThompsonSupreme Court of Louisiana· 1906-03-26· cited 14×
- State v. KennedySupreme Court of Louisiana· 1957-04-01· cited 13×
- Sherman v. Southern Pacific Co.Nevada Supreme Court· 1910-10-15· cited 12×
- State v. McGuireSupreme Court of Louisiana· 1969-06-27· cited 10×
- State v. AllenSupreme Court of Louisiana· 1903-12-14· cited 8×
- State v. WhiteSupreme Court of Louisiana· 1923-02-26· cited 7×
Cites
6 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Smith v. Goodyear Dental Vulcanite Co.Supreme Court· 1877-01-18· cited 297×
- Wiggins v. PeopleSupreme Court· 1876-12-22· cited 50×
- Story v. StateIndiana Supreme Court· 1885-01-10· cited 31×
- Walker v. CommonwealthCourt of Appeals of Kentucky· 1871-06-28· cited 13×
- Oder v. CommonwealthCourt of Appeals of Kentucky· 1882-01-22· cited 11×
- Degraffenreid v. ThomasSupreme Court of Alabama· 1848-06-15· cited 9×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.