Glass v. State
| Citation | 136 S.E.2d 199,109 Ga.App. 353 |
| Decision Date | 13 March 1964 |
| Docket Number | No. 2,No. 40628,40628,2 |
| Parties | Lela M. GLASS v. The STATE |
| Court | United States Court of Appeals (Georgia) |
C. B. King, Albany, for plaintiff in error.
Marcus B. Calhoun, Sol., Thomasville, for defendant in error.
Syllabus Opinion by the Court
The defendant was tried and convicted under an accusation charging her with pointing a gun at another. Before pleading the defendant filed a challenge to the array of the traverse jury based upon the ground the systematic, arbitrary and deliberate exclusion of members of the Negro race from serving as jurors in such court was a violation of the defendant's rights 'as provided for under the equal protection clause and due process clause' of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. After hearing evidence the trial court overruled the challenge to the array and proceeded with the trial of the main case which resulted in the conviction of the defendant. Thereafter, the defendant's amended motion for new trial was overruled and by writ of error the adverse judgments were appealed to the Supreme Court. The case was transferred to this court when the Supreme Court determined that the case involved '[T]he application of unquestioned and unambiguous provisions of the Constitution to a given state of facts.' Glass v. State, 219 Ga. 565, 134 S.E.2d 813. The solicitor of the trial court testified on cross examination that he had not seen a Negro serve on the juries in such court over a period of twelve years, and the clerk testified on cross examination that names of prospective Negro jurors on the jury list carry a designation of their racial identity. Held: Under the decision of the Supreme Court of the United States in Avery v. Georgia, 345 U.S. 559, 73 S.Ct. 891, 97 L.Ed. 1244, the defendant made out a prima facie case of racial discrimination and the burden was upon the State to overcome such prima facie case. No evidence was introduced by the State and the trial court erred in overruling the challenge to the array. The further proceedings were nugatory.
Judgment reversed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Allen v. State
...and its action is invalid. Georgia Ry. v. Cole, 73 Ga. 713, 715; Tompkins v. State, 138 Ga. 465, 469, 75 S.E. 594; Glass v. State, 109 Ga.App. 353, 354, 136 S.E.2d 199; Ludden v. State, 109 Ga.App. 745, 137 S.E.2d 402; Collins v. Walker, 329 F.2d 100, 105 (5th Cir.1964); Hammers v. State, O......
-
Cobb v. Balkcom
...effect to this principle. Wilson v. State, 1882, 69 Ga. 224; Crumb v. State, 1949, 205 Ga. 547, 54 S.E.2d 639; and Glass v. State, 1964, 109 Ga.App. 353, 136 S.E.2d 199. See also Allen v. State, 1964, 110 Ga.App. 56, 137 S.E.2d 711, extending the right to challenge a jury composition on thi......
-
Ludden v. State
...error. Syllabus Opinion by the Court NICHOLS, Presiding Judge. This case is controlled by the decision of this court in Glass v. State, 109 Ga.App. 353, 136 S.E.2d 199, following Avery v. Georgia, 345 U.S. 559, 73 S.Ct. 891, 97 L.Ed. 1244, and the judgment of trial court overruling the defe......