United States v. Baker
District Court, S.D. New York
The defendant in this ease [Garniss E. Baker] was convicted of an offence under the national banking act. After the verdict, a motion was made to set it aside on the ground, among others, that one of the jurors was deaf and did not and could not hear the evidence, and that the defendant was ignorant. at the time the jury were sworn and empanelled, of the deafness of the juror.
1Opinion of the Court
BLATCHFORD. District Judge.
On principle. as well as on authority, nothing that is a cause of challenge to a juror before verdict, can be used to set aside a verdict, as for a mistrial, even though the cause of challenge was unknown to the party when the jury *953were sworn. Hollingsworth v. Duane, 4 Dall. [4 U. S.] 353. The nonpossession of any natural faculty stands, in respect to a juror duly summoned, in the same category with alienage or infancy or sex. That a juror is an alien is an objection that must be taken advantage of before verdict and by challenge. Hollingsworth v. Duane, before…
2Cited by5 opinions
- State v. PickettSupreme Court of Iowa · 1897
- Brewer v. JacobsUnited States Circuit Court · 1884
- Hansel v. CollinsCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1941
- Dickerson v. North Jersey Street Railway Co.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1902
- United States v. AngneyDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1887