People v. Coyodo
California Supreme Court
Appeal from tb© Eleventh District Court, County of Cal-averas. The facts are sufficiently stated in the opinion. First — The Court erred in overruling defendant’s challenge to the panel and list-of jurors appearing pursuant to the special venire.
Read the full summary
Appeal from tb© Eleventh District Court, County of Cal-averas. The facts are sufficiently stated in the opinion. First — The Court erred in overruling defendant’s challenge to the panel and list-of jurors appearing pursuant to the special venire. When the panel is formed from persons whose names are not drawn from the grand jury bos, a challenge may be made to the panel on account of any bias of the officer who summoned the jury which would be good grounds of challenge to a juror. (Orim. Pr. Act Sec. 337.) Section 346 Crim. Pr. Act, lays clown tbe distinction between “actual” and “implied”…
1Opinion of the Court
Temple J.,
delivered tbe opinion of tbe Court, Rhodes, C. J., Wallaoe J., and Crockett J., concurring:
Tbe defendant was convicted of tbe crime of murder in tbe first degree. At tbe trial, from tbe regular panel, ten jurors were selected and sworn — tbe regular panel being then exhausted. By tbis time tbe defendant bad exhausted all bis peremptory challenges. A special venire for six additional jurors having been issued, was served by tbe Sheriff, and tbe jurors summoned appeared in Court. Tbe defendant then interposed a challenge to tbe panel returned on tbe special venire, on tbe ground that…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Davis v. HearstCalifornia Supreme Court · 1911
- State v. McCallumIdaho Supreme Court · 1956
- Warner v. Southern Pacific Co.California Supreme Court · 1896
- State v. AdairIdaho Supreme Court · 1950
- State v. JordanIdaho Supreme Court · 1911