State v. Bucy

• Decision Date: 27 April 1937
• Docket Number: No. 7676.,7676.
• Citation: 104 Mont. 416
• Parties: STATE v. BUCY.
• Court: Montana Supreme Court

104 Mont. 416

STATE
v.
BUCY.

No. 7676.

Supreme Court of Montana.

April 12, 1937.
Rehearing Denied April 27, 1937.

Appeal from District Court, Galatin County; Benjamin E. Berg, Judge.

Louie Bucy was convicted for assault in the first degree. From an order denying a new trial, he appeals.

Order affirmed.

E. F. Bunker, of Bozeman, for appellant.

H. B. Landoe, of Bozeman, for the State.

ANGSTMAN, Justice.

Defendant was found guilty of assault in the first degree; he moved for a new trial, which was denied. The appeal is from the order denying a new trial.

The sole question presented by the appeal is whether a new trial should have been granted by reason of the alleged insanity of one of the jurors who sat in the case. In support of the motion for new trial affidavits were presented showing that one of the jurors on July 21, 1927, had been declared insane and ordered committed to the insane asylum, and that he had never been judicially restored to competency either by court order or by a certificate under section 5685, Revised Codes, and that the fact of the insanity proceedings was not known to defendant or his counsel until after the verdict was returned.

In opposition to the motion the State filed affidavits of two physicians stating, in effect, that they examined the juror on November 28, 1936, being the day the verdict was rendered; that they were of opinion that the juror is “quite competent mentally,” and that, after having an extended conversation with him, they did not notice any abnormality in his mind or conduct at that time. A layman well acquainted with the juror made affidavit that he had never noticed any peculiarity in the actions, manner or talk of the juror, and that he knew him to be a competent and trustworthy farm employee.

The juror himself made affidavit that he had been committed to the asylum on July 21, 1927, and was released in September of the same year after the officers of the institution had notified his parents that he was cured and ready to be released. He stated that the reason for his confinement was a nervous breakdown; that after his release he worked as a farm laborer, and that since the spring of 1934 he has been a ranch foreman. At the time of the hearing on the motion for new trial the juror was examined as a witness and testified more in detail relative to the matters contained in his affidavit. The records of the court resulting in the commitment in 1927 were also introduced in evidence.

Under our statutes...