Dicks v. State
| Decision Date | 12 June 1922 |
| Citation | 83 Fla. 717,93 So. 137 |
| Parties | DICKS v. State |
| Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Error to Circuit Court, Union County; A. V. Long, Judge.
Willie Dicks was convicted of manslaughter, and be brings error.
Affirmed.
Syllabus by the Court
Hypothetical questions embodying testimony intended to be submitted to ascertain how juror will vote thereon improper. Prospective jurors are examined on their voir dire for the purpose of ascertaining if they are qualified to serve, and it is not proper to propound hypothetical questions purporting to embody testimony that is intended to be submitted, covering all or any aspects of the case, for the purpose of ascertaining from the juror how he will vote on such a state of the testimony.
Hypothetical questions seeking advanced indication of decision on stated facts incompetent. The examination of persons called to act as jurors is limited to such matters as tend to disclose their qualifications in that regard, under the established provisions and rules of law; and hypothetical questions are not competent, when their evident purpose is to have the jurors indicate in advance what their decision will be under a certain state of the evidence, or upon a certain state of facts, and thus possibly commit them to certain ideas or views when the case shall be finally submitted to them for their decision.
Where question does not indicate it, proper practice to apprise court of answer sought. Where a question propounded to a witness does not indicate the answer, the proper practice is to apprise the court of the answer sought to be elicited, so that he may determine its materiality and relevancy.
Not necessary to serve notice of charge on parents or guardian of married minor, where mental capacity not involved. The mental capacity of 'a minor, not married' is not involved in applying section 6028, Rev. Gen. St. 1920, providing for certain procedure in the trial of such minor.
Not necessary that sentence recite proceedings in cause prior to imposition. A sentence does not have no contain a recital of all the proceedings had in the cause prior to its imposition.
Failure in sentence to name crime may be supplied by a reference to rest of record. The failure in the sentence to name the crime for which the prisoner is sentenced may be supplied by reference to the rest of the record.
Not essential that sentence recite that accused had been tried and found guilty by jury. It is not essential to the validity of a sentence that it recite that the prisoner had 'been tried and found guilty by a jury.'
Sentence to state penitentiary not defective because it does not name state. The sentence or judgment 'that you, A. B., be delivered by the sheriff of Union county, to the proper officer of the state penitentiary, there to be confined at hard labor,' etc., is not defective because it does not mention Florida in naming the penitentiary where the prisoner is to be confined, where the record shows that the defendant was tried and convicted in the state of Florida.
A. Z. Adkins, of Starke, for plaintiff in error.
Rivers Buford, Atty. Gen., and Marvin C. McIntosh, Asst. Atty. Gen for the State.
The plaintiff in error, indicted for murder in the first degree and convicted of manslaughter, seeks reversal here on writ of error.
The first assignment of error is based upon the ruling of the court sustaining the state's objection to the question propounded to the jurors, when being examined on their voir dire:
Prospective jurors are examined on their voir dire for the purpose of ascertaining if they are qualified to serve, and it is not proper to propound hypothetical questions purporting to embody testimony that is intended to be submitted, covering all or any aspects of the case, for the purpose of ascertaining from the juror how he will vote on such a state of the testimony. Such questions are improper, regardless of whether or not they correctly epitomize the testimony intended to be introduced.
To propound to a juror a question purporting to contain an epitome of the testimony subsequently to be introduced, and ask whether he would acquit or convict upon such testimony, would have the effect of ascertaining his verdict in advance of his hearing the sworn testimony of the witnesses.
Such a procedure would revolutionize jury trials.
The rule governing the scope of the inquiry into the qualifications of a person called for jury duty, is thus laid down in 16 R. C. L. 281:
'It is a rule that the examination of persons called to act as jurors is limited to such matters as tend to disclose their qualifications in that regard, under the established provisions and rules of law; and hypothetical questions are not competent, when their evident purpose is to have the jurors indicate in advance what their decision will be under a certain state of the evidence, or upon a certain state of facts, and thus possibly commit them to certain ideas or views when the case shall be finally submitted to them for their decision.'
There was no error in sustaining the objection made by the state to this question.
Whether or not a prospective juror is impartial and has the necessary qualifications for jury duty, which is the sole purpose of the examination of talesmen on their voir dire, cannot be determined by propounding hypothetical questions containing what purports to be the testimony subsequently to be introduced and eliciting from him a reply as to whether he...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Calloway v. State
...(citations omitted)); Franqui v. State , 699 So.2d 1312, 1322 n.5 (Fla. 1997) (citing Vining , 637 So.2d at 921 ; Dicks v. State , 83 Fla. 717, 93 So. 137, 138 (1922) ). "Such a procedure would revolutionize jury trials." Dicks , 93 So. at 137.We distinguish this case from Lavado , which in......
-
Franqui v. State
...a particular defense would be improper. See id. at 920 n. 3; compare Pope v. State, 84 Fla. 428, 94 So. 865 (1922) with Dicks v. State, 83 Fla. 717, 93 So. 137 (1922). In this case, during voir dire, defense counsel asked: "Do you feel that the defendant's young age would be a factor you wo......
-
Lavado v. State
...and answers but their disposition as to whether or not they would entertain a particular defense is not appropriate. Dicks v. State, 83 Fla. 717, 93 So. 137 (1922); Saulsberry v. State, 398 So.2d 1017 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981). In Dicks v. State, supra, the Supreme Court stated the * * * * * * "T......
-
Sherman v. William M. Ryan & Sons, Inc.
... ... which will not constitute reversible error unless clearly ... abused, and where harmful prejudice appears to have been ... caused thereby. State v. McGee, 80 Conn. 614, 619, ... 69 A. 1059; State v. Lee, 69 Conn. 186, 195, 37 A ... 75; 35 C.J. 389. However, as a new trial must be had in any ... 803, 804; Commonwealth v. Van ... Horn, 188 Pa. 143, 165, 41 A. 469, 472; State v ... Bokien, 14 Wash. 403, 410, 44 P. 889, 891; Dicks" v ... State, 83 Fla. 717, 718, 93 So. 137, 138; Woollen v ... Wire, 110 Ind. 251, 11 N.E. 236, 237; 16 R.C.L. 281, § ... 97. General Statutes, \xC2" ... ...