People v. McGungill
California Supreme Court
Appeal from, the County Court of Mendocino County. The defendant was convicted of the crime of grand larceny, and appealed from the judgment and order denying a . new trial. The other facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court, Sprague, J.:
The error assigned for disallowance of defendant’s challenges of R. H. Anderson and S. S. Baechtel, as trial jurors *430“ for implied bias,” cannot be considered upon the record as presented, hi either challenge appears to have been made for any specific cause authorized by statute. To simply state that “the juror is challenged for implied bias ” is no challenge. A challenge for implied bias must state some one of the nine causes enumerated in section three hundred and forty-seven of the Criminal Practice Act. (People v. Hardin, 37 Cal. 258; People v. Dick, id. 379.)
Again…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- People v. CampbellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1870
- People v. TylerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1869
- People v. TrimCalifornia Supreme Court · 1870
- People v. HardinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1869
3Cited by38 opinions
- Johnson v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1943
- People v. DurrantCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897
- People v. MayenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1922
- People v. NakisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1920
- Shields v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1897
33 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.