State v. Berry

Appellant sets forth five basic contentions, and we deal with them in the order presented.

I

It is urged that the trial court erred in allowing the state to exercise its sixth peremptory challenge on a juror after the prosecutor had expressed satisfaction with the jury as it was then constituted. Appellant argues that the prosecutor had forfeited the use of a peremptory challenge on a juror who had been seated at the time he made the statement.

We do not believe that the prosecutor’s statement, “the state is satisfied with the jury as it is now constituted,” made after he had exercised five…