State v. Mayfield

Citations

• 104 La. 173

Syllabus

<p>Syllabus.</p> <p>1. Objection to the action of the court in overruling a motion for a continuance should be preserved by a bill of exception, taken at the time, and not brought up in a bill first taken on the overruling of a motion for a new trial. If considered at all, when so made the objection must be considered from the standpoint of the whole situation as developed by the trial.</p> <p>2. Though a juror state that he had formed an opinion in the case, from having talked to two of the witnesses whom he knew to be truthful men, and that it would take strong evidence to remove the opinion he had formed, he will be held a competent juror when he further states that he had no fixed opinion; that his mind was in such a condition that he could go on the jury and depend entirely on the law and evidence in arriving at his verdict; that he had no bias or prejudice against the accused; that he could disregard the opinion he had, and it would have no influence or effect in determining his verdict, and the court declares that the juror was a man of high character, and it believed he was answering truthfully.</p>