Menefee v. State

• Decision Date: 29 May 1925
• Docket Number: A-4665.
• Citation: 236 P. 439,30 Okla.Crim. 400
• Parties: MENEFEE v. STATE.
• Court: United States State Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma. Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

236 P. 439

30 Okla.Crim. 400

MENEFEE v. STATE.

No. A-4665.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

May 29, 1925

Syllabus by the Court.

On a trial for unlawful possession of intoxicating liquor, the defendant has the right to ask the jurors on their voir dire to enable him to exercise his right of peremptory challenge whether they are members of the Ku Klux Klan, where counsel states that that organization is taking a particular interest in the prosecution in which they are called to sit as jurors.

Refusal to permit jurors to answer the defendant's question whether they belonged to the Ku Klux Klan, for the purpose of laying a foundation for peremptory challenge of jurors held, reversible error.

Appeal from County Court, Woods County; J. J. Glasser, Judge.

Paul Menefee was convicted of unlawful possession of intoxicating liquor, and he appeals. Reversed.

A. J Stevens and C. E. Wilhite, both of Alva, for plaintiff in error.

George F. Short, Atty. Gen., and Fred Hansen, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.

DOYLE J.

Plaintiff in error, Paul Menefee, was convicted on a charge of unlawful possession of intoxicating liquor, and in accordance with the verdict of the jury was sentenced to be confined in jail for 60 days and to pay a fine of $200. To reverse the judgment he appeals.

The sheriff, a deputy sheriff, and the city marshal of Alva testified that on March 10, 1923, under authority of a search warrant they visited the premises occupied by the defendant on the corner of Seventh and Santa Fé streets in the city of Alva, where they found and seized four or five bottles containing three quarts and three-fourths of a pint of corn whisky. The defendant was not at home. Mr. Rhodes, his brother-in-law and two sisters were there when the search was made.

At the close of the state's evidence the defendant demurred to the evidence and moved the court to advise the jury to return a verdict of not guilty on the grounds that the evidence was insufficient to prove the commission of any offense, and that the evidence was insufficient to connect him with the alleged offense. The demurrer was overruled and the motion denied.

A number of errors are assigned. The first is as follows:

The refusal of the trial court to permit the defendant to examine the jurors on their voir dire as a basis for the intelligent exercise of his peremptory challenges. The record shows that the court refused to permit the following questions to be asked and allowed exceptions:

"Q. Are you now, or have you ever been, a member of the Ku Klux Klan, or what is more commonly known as the Invisible Empire?

Q. Do you believe in the teachings, beliefs and practices of the Ku Klux Klan, and do you believe such organization is necessary to assist and aid the legally elected and qualified authorities in this state in enforcing the law?"

Counsel in their brief say:

"The defendant maintains that by the refusal of the trial court to permit him to examine the jurors on these matters he was prejudiced to such an extent that he could not properly exercise his peremptory challenges. And, further, in view of the fact that immediately prior to the convening of the said county court that secret organization caused to be distributed throughout the county of Woods handbills and 'dodgers,' on which were printed sundry things that organization stood for, and heading the list was 'the elimination of the bootlegger,' and third on the list was 'trial by jury in all other cases.' He was denied a fair and impartial trial."

The Constitution guarantees to every defendant in a criminal case a fair trial by an impartial jury. In order to determine whether the person called as a juror possesses the necessary qualifications, whether he has prejudged the case, whether his mind is free from prejudice or bias, the defendant has the right to ask him questions the answer to which may tend to show that he may be challenged for...