State v. Baker

• Citation: 99 S.E. 348,112 S.C. 142
• Decision Date: 29 April 1919
• Docket Number: 10196.
• Parties: STATE v. BAKER.
• Court: United States State Supreme Court of South Carolina

99 S.E. 348

112 S.C. 142

STATE v. BAKER.

No. 10196.

Supreme Court of South Carolina

April 29, 1919

Appeal from General Sessions Circuit Court of Kershaw County; R. W Memminger, Judge.

Andrew Baker was convicted of murder, and he appeals. Affirmed.

W. B De Loach and M. L. Smith, both of Camden, for appellant.

W Hampton Cobb and A. F. Spigner, Solsboth of Columbia, for the State.

WATTS J.

This is an appeal from an order of his honor Judge Memminger in ordering a mistrial in this case, after arraignment, plea of not guilty to the indictment by the defendant and after two jurors had been accepted and sworn and taken their seats as jurors in the case. After this Juror Baum was called and accepted by both the state and defendant and sworn. When he was accepted and ordered to be sworn he attempted to address the court, and, when clerk finished the oath administered to him, he informed the court that he was opposed to capital punishment. His honor had him sworn on his voir dire and examined him, asking the usual questions propounded in such examinations. He answered emphatically that he was opposed to the infliction of capital punishment in any case and would not agree to any verdict which involved the infliction of the death penalty.

His honor ruled that it would be unfair to the state to go on organizing a jury with this juror, who had already, by his own statement, acquitted the defendant on the main charge against him, and his honor held that this juror was not indifferent, but disqualified and declined to proceed, and ordered a mistrial, and no objection was made to this order either by the state or the defendant.

After ordering a mistrial, the court directed the clerk to proceed and draw another jury for the trial of the case. Whereupon counsel for the defendant stated to the court that the defendant interposed a special plea of former jeopardy, stating:

"We contend that after a juror has been presented by the state and accepted and sworn that your honor should not have ordered a mistrial."

The court overruled this plea and proceeded to draw and swear the jury and try the case. The defendant was convicted of murder with a recommendation of mercy to the court. The last jury had the same two jurors on it who had been accepted and sworn before the mistrial was ordered.

After sentence defendant appeals, and by five exceptions imputes error on the part of his honor in ordering a...