Hawkins v. Andrews
Supreme Court of Georgia
New trial because jurors incompetent. By Judge Worrill. Muscogee Superior Court. November Term, 1868. Hawkins brought trespass vi et armis, against Andrews for unlawfully beating him, etc., and obtained a judgment against him.
Read the full summary
New trial because jurors incompetent. By Judge Worrill. Muscogee Superior Court. November Term, 1868. Hawkins brought trespass vi et armis, against Andrews for unlawfully beating him, etc., and obtained a judgment against him. Andrews’ counsel moved for a new trial, and the Judge granted it upon the ground that two of the jurors who tried said cause were of the grand jury who had found a true bill against said Andrews on account of said trespass, Andrews being ignorant of that fact until after the trial. This is assigned as error.
1Opinion of the CourtWarner, J.
The Court below granted a new trial in this case, on the ground that two of the jurors who tried it had been members of the grand jury who had found a true bill against the defendant for the same trespass on the criminal side of the Court, which is now assigned for error here. By the common law, jurors must be omni exoeptione majares, and it was a principal cause of challenge that one had formerly been a juror in the same cause: 3rd Bl. Com., 363. This principle of the common law was recognized and affirmed by this Court, in the case of The Mayor, etc., of Columbus, vs. Goetchins, 7 Ga. R.,…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Hill v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1880
- Bitting v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1927
- Betts v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1881
- Scott & Co. v. McDonaldSupreme Court of Georgia · 1889