Beeman v. People, No. C-987

Docket NºNo. C-987
Citation565 P.2d 1340, 193 Colo. 337
Case DateJune 27, 1977
CourtSupreme Court of Colorado

Page 1340

565 P.2d 1340
193 Colo. 337
Lawrence Eugene BEEMAN, Petitioner,
v.
The PEOPLE of the State of Colorado, Respondent.
No. C-987.
Supreme Court of Colorado, En Banc.
June 27, 1977.

[193 Colo. 338]

Page 1341

James Robert Barash, Colorado Springs, for petitioner.

J. D. MacFarlane, Atty. Gen., Jean E. Dubofsky, Deputy Atty. Gen., Edward G. Donovan, Sol. Gen., Deborah L. Bianco, J. Stephen Phillips, Asst. Attys. Gen., Denver, for respondent.

PRINGLE, Chief Justice.

The defendant was convicted of rape and deviate sexual intercourse by force in violation of C.R.S.1963, sections 40-3-401 and 40-3-403, now sections 18-3-401 and 18-3-403, C.R.S.1973, and his conviction was affirmed by the court of appeals. People v. Beeman, Colo.App., 551 P.2d 726 (1976). We granted certiorari and we now reverse and remand [193 Colo. 339] for a new trial.

I

During the trial, one of the jurors informed the bailiff that there was a possibility that she knew the defendant. The defendant thereupon moved for a mistrial and, the trial judge held an in camera examination to determine if the juror should be disqualified for bias. See section 16-10-103(j), C.R.S.1973; cf. Hopkins v. People, 89 Colo. 296, 1 P.2d 937 (1931).

At the in camera hearing, the juror stated that she believed the defendant may have been a man who had greatly upset her pregnant daughter. Her testimony was that this man had come to the daughter's home to discuss the sale of a home freezer food plan, but rather than discussing the food plan the man had talked about politics and the future of the world. Although there were no sexual implications to this meeting, the daughter was so upset that several days later the juror felt compelled to call the man's employer and complain. It was further disclosed that the juror thought it possible that a pearl handled

Page 1342

knife allegedly used in the rape was the knife that was missing from her daughter's home.

During the examination, the judge questioned the juror about her capacity to act impartially in this case, and she gave assurances of her ability and desire to decide the case fairly. The judge thereupon denied the defendant's motion for a mistrial and the juror resumed her place on the jury.

The impartiality of jurors is a fundamental aspect of the Angelo-American conception of trial by jury, see Irvin v. Dowd, 366 U.S. 717, 81 S.Ct. 1639, 6 L.Ed.2d 751 (1961); Metallic Gold Mining Co. v. Watson, 51 Colo. 278, 117 P. 609 (1911), for it is this impartiality which ensures that a...

To continue reading

Request your trial
26 practice notes
  • Dallman v. Ritter, No. 09SA224.
    • United States
    • Colorado Supreme Court of Colorado
    • February 22, 2010
    ..."its deficiencies were so pervasive that it could not be salvaged as a meaningful legislative enactment"); Pierce, 193 Colo. at 352, 565 P.2d at 1340 ("While the [obscenity] ordinance in question contains a `severability' clause ... the pervasive character of its deficiencies renders futile......
  • People v. Pena-Rodriguez, No. 11CA0034.
    • United States
    • Colorado Court of Appeals of Colorado
    • November 8, 2012
    ...Dunoyair, 660 P.2d 890, 896 (Colo.1983). ¶ 16 Actual bias requires more than an abstract belief in a defendant's guilt. Beeman v. People, 193 Colo. 337, 340, 565 P.2d 1340, 1342 (1977). Rather, the circumstances must show a "personal and emotional" connection between the juror and the defen......
  • People v. Thatcher, No. 79SA390
    • United States
    • Colorado Supreme Court of Colorado
    • December 21, 1981
    ...the defendant's arrest for the offense being tried. People v. Beeman, 37 Colo.App. 417, 551 P.2d 726 (1976), reversed on other grounds, 193 Colo. 337, 565 P.2d 1340 (1977). Here the photo and defendant's subsequent incarceration in the Montrose County Jail were in connection with a subseque......
  • Blades v. DaFoe, No. 83SC306
    • United States
    • Colorado Supreme Court of Colorado
    • July 8, 1985
    ...court's discretion abridges a litigant's right to a fair and impartial jury and thus constitutes reversible error. Beeman v. People, 193 Colo. 337, 565 P.2d 1340 (1977). The fact that the party whose challenge for cause was denied exercised a peremptory challenge to excuse the juror does no......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
26 cases
  • Dallman v. Ritter, No. 09SA224.
    • United States
    • Colorado Supreme Court of Colorado
    • February 22, 2010
    ..."its deficiencies were so pervasive that it could not be salvaged as a meaningful legislative enactment"); Pierce, 193 Colo. at 352, 565 P.2d at 1340 ("While the [obscenity] ordinance in question contains a `severability' clause ... the pervasive character of its deficiencies renders futile......
  • People v. Pena-Rodriguez, No. 11CA0034.
    • United States
    • Colorado Court of Appeals of Colorado
    • November 8, 2012
    ...Dunoyair, 660 P.2d 890, 896 (Colo.1983). ¶ 16 Actual bias requires more than an abstract belief in a defendant's guilt. Beeman v. People, 193 Colo. 337, 340, 565 P.2d 1340, 1342 (1977). Rather, the circumstances must show a "personal and emotional" connection between the juror and the defen......
  • People v. Thatcher, No. 79SA390
    • United States
    • Colorado Supreme Court of Colorado
    • December 21, 1981
    ...the defendant's arrest for the offense being tried. People v. Beeman, 37 Colo.App. 417, 551 P.2d 726 (1976), reversed on other grounds, 193 Colo. 337, 565 P.2d 1340 (1977). Here the photo and defendant's subsequent incarceration in the Montrose County Jail were in connection with a subseque......
  • Blades v. DaFoe, No. 83SC306
    • United States
    • Colorado Supreme Court of Colorado
    • July 8, 1985
    ...court's discretion abridges a litigant's right to a fair and impartial jury and thus constitutes reversible error. Beeman v. People, 193 Colo. 337, 565 P.2d 1340 (1977). The fact that the party whose challenge for cause was denied exercised a peremptory challenge to excuse the juror does no......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT