State v. Parker
Citations
- 25 Wash. 405
- 65 P. 776
- 1901 Wash. LEXIS 407
Syllabus
<p>CRIMINAL LAW-SEPARATION OF JUEY-CONSENT OF ACCUSED.</p> <p>Under Bal. Code, § 6947, which provides that “juries in criminal cases shall not be allowed to separate, except by consent of the defendant and the prosecuting attorney,” it is reversible error for the court to ask defendant, in the presence of the jury, after the trial had proceeded two days without separation, and the case was almost ready to submit, if he would consent to one of the jurors returning home because of the sickness of his child, to which separation defendant was thus compelled to consent, for fear of prejudicing his case in the mind of said juror.</p> <p>SAME-MISCONDUCT OE JUKY.</p> <p>A juror who has testified on his voir dire examination that he did not know defendant, and that he could fairly and impartially try the case, free from bias, is guilty of such misconduct as to entitle defendant to a new trial, where, after retirement to the jury room, he makes statements to his fellow-jurors of facts not in evidence against defendant, and asserts his belief in his guilt because he knew him to be a member of a gang of toughs.</p>
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- granting new trial due to one juror’s statements during de liberations that he knew the defendant to be a member of a gang and to have been implicated in a murder; the juror had falsely denied any knowledge during voir dire
- granting new trial due to one juror's statements during deliberations that he knew the defendant to be a member of a gang and to have been implicated in a murder; the juror had falsely denied any knowledge during voir dire
- juror told others he knew the defendant was a member of a \gang of toughs\ and had been implicated in a murder
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Dunbar, Hadley
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
36 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Gardner v. MaloneWashington Supreme Court· 1962-11-29· cited 114×
- Byerly v. MadsenCourt of Appeals of Washington· 1985-08-15· cited 107×
- Richards v. Overlake Hospital Medical CenterCourt of Appeals of Washington· 1990-09-17· cited 71×
- State v. JackmanWashington Supreme Court· 1989-12-14· cited 48×
- Halverson v. AndersonWashington Supreme Court· 1973-09-06· cited 46×
- Maryland Casualty Co. v. Seattle Electric Co.Washington Supreme Court· 1913-09-16· cited 44×
- State v. WilsonWashington Supreme Court· 1967-08-24· cited 42×
- Kiewit-Grice v. StateCourt of Appeals of Washington· 1995-05-19· cited 37×
- State v. AdamoWashington Supreme Court· 1924-02-14· cited 36×
- State v. AkerWashington Supreme Court· 1909-08-02· cited 28×
- State v. WinnettWashington Supreme Court· 1907-12-16· cited 27×
- State v. GobinWashington Supreme Court· 1968-02-15· cited 26×
- Meerdink v. KriegerCourt of Appeals of Washington· 1976-05-25· cited 23×
- State v. LorenzyWashington Supreme Court· 1910-07-09· cited 22×
- Marvin v. YatesWashington Supreme Court· 1901-09-05· cited 19×
- Ralton v. Sherwood Logging Co.Washington Supreme Court· 1909-07-17· cited 18×
- Turner v. StimeCourt of Appeals of Washington· 2009-12-17· cited 15×
- Rosier v. PeopleSupreme Court of Colorado· 1952-07-14· cited 14×
- Long v. Brusco Tug & Barge, Inc.Washington Supreme Court· 2016-02-25· cited 13×
- Hinkel v. Oregon Chair Co.Oregon Supreme Court· 1916-04-11· cited 12×
Cites
2 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
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.