Hicks v. State, No. 25223.

Docket NºNo. 25223.
Citation199 Ind. 401, 156 N.E. 548
Case DateMay 26, 1927
CourtSupreme Court of Indiana

199 Ind. 401
156 N.E. 548

HICKS
v.
STATE.

No. 25223.

Supreme Court of Indiana.

May 26, 1927.


Appeal from Criminal Court, Marion County; James A. Cox, Judge.

Roosevelt Hicks was convicted of murder in the first degree, and he appeals. Affirmed.


Ira M. Holmes, of Indianapolis, for appellant.

Arthur L. Gilliom, Atty. Gen., and Edward J. Lennon, Jr., Deputy Atty. Gen., for the State.


MYERS, J.

In the court below appellant was indicted, tried, and convicted by a jury of the crime of murder in the first degree and sentenced to suffer death. His motion for a new trial was overruled, and this ruling is assigned as error. The only causes relied on for a new trial may be combined, and, this done, the question presented is: Did the court commit reversible error in requiring appellant, over his objection and exception, to first examine the jury on its voir dire?

[1] As we understand appellant, he takes the position that the law will regard as prejudicial any affirmative burden the defendant is required to assume in a criminal case. The Constitution of this state, article 1, § 13, known as the Bill of Rights, provides that: “In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall have the right to a public trial by an impartial jury. ***” From such guarantee it no doubt follows that the accused must be given every reasonable opportunity to procure a fair and impartial jury. He was charged with a capital offense and, by statute, given the right to challenge peremptorily 20 jurors. Section 2255, Burns' 1926. The state is also given the same number of peremptory challenges. Section 2256, Burns' 1926.

[2] We have no statute, as do Missouri and New York, nor for aught appearing is there any rule of court fixing the order in which these challenges shall be exercised, or which of the parties to the action shall first proceed with such void dire examination. But appellant insists that the well established and recognized practice in civil cases is that the party having the burden of the issue has the burden of first passing the jury, or to examine the jury first on its voir dire, although there is no provision in the Civil Code requiring it. Hence, it is claimed that the rule of practice in civil cases must be applied in criminal prosecutions, citing section 2406, Burns' 1926, wherein it is provided that:

[156 N.E. 549]

“In all criminal cases where no special provision has been made in this act, the rules of pleading and practice in civil actions shall govern, so far as...

To continue reading

Request your trial
6 practice notes
  • State ex rel. Fox v. La Porte Circuit Court, No. 3583
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court of Indiana
    • December 17, 1956
    ...jury. This right has repeatedly been affirmed by the court. See Foreman v. State, 1932, 203 Ind. 324, 180 N.E. 291; Hicks v. State, 1927, 199 Ind. 401, 156 N.E. 548. However, it is significant that the above provision in the Constitution of Indiana guarantees only 'an impartial jury, in the......
  • Hawkins v. State, No. 27534.
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court of Indiana
    • November 5, 1941
    ...abuse of discretion appearing, the alleged error is not available to appellant. He cites only two cases. The first, Hicks v. State, 1927, 199 Ind. 401, 156 N.E. 548, is not in point. The other, Silverman v. State, 1927, 199 Ind. 225, 156 N.E. 549, is distinguishable. The court therein recog......
  • State v. Lizotte
    • United States
    • Supreme Judicial Court of Maine (US)
    • January 27, 1969
    ...v. Flint, 60 Vt. 304, 14 A. 178, 2. p. 184 (1888); Commonwealth v. White, 208 Mass. 202, 94 N.E. 391, 393 (1911); and Hicks v. State, 199 Ind. 401, 156 N.E. 548, 1st Col. 549 In anticipation of our M.R.Crim.Proc., effective December 1, 1965, and thereafter prior to the time of this trial, t......
  • Minardo v. State, No. 25367.
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court of Indiana
    • December 21, 1932
    ...presented, supported by the same argument and authorities, considered and decided contrary to appellant's insistence in Hicks v. State, 199 Ind. 401, 156 N. E. 548. We have again examined carefully our ruling in the Hicks Case without finding any reason to change our views therein expressed......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
6 cases
  • State ex rel. Fox v. La Porte Circuit Court, No. 3583
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court of Indiana
    • December 17, 1956
    ...jury. This right has repeatedly been affirmed by the court. See Foreman v. State, 1932, 203 Ind. 324, 180 N.E. 291; Hicks v. State, 1927, 199 Ind. 401, 156 N.E. 548. However, it is significant that the above provision in the Constitution of Indiana guarantees only 'an impartial jury, in the......
  • Hawkins v. State, No. 27534.
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court of Indiana
    • November 5, 1941
    ...abuse of discretion appearing, the alleged error is not available to appellant. He cites only two cases. The first, Hicks v. State, 1927, 199 Ind. 401, 156 N.E. 548, is not in point. The other, Silverman v. State, 1927, 199 Ind. 225, 156 N.E. 549, is distinguishable. The court therein recog......
  • State v. Lizotte
    • United States
    • Supreme Judicial Court of Maine (US)
    • January 27, 1969
    ...v. Flint, 60 Vt. 304, 14 A. 178, 2. p. 184 (1888); Commonwealth v. White, 208 Mass. 202, 94 N.E. 391, 393 (1911); and Hicks v. State, 199 Ind. 401, 156 N.E. 548, 1st Col. 549 In anticipation of our M.R.Crim.Proc., effective December 1, 1965, and thereafter prior to the time of this trial, t......
  • Minardo v. State, No. 25367.
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court of Indiana
    • December 21, 1932
    ...presented, supported by the same argument and authorities, considered and decided contrary to appellant's insistence in Hicks v. State, 199 Ind. 401, 156 N. E. 548. We have again examined carefully our ruling in the Hicks Case without finding any reason to change our views therein expressed......
  • 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