State v. Cockman

• Decision Date: 31 December 1864
• Citation: 2 Win. 95,60 N.C. 484
• Court: North Carolina Supreme Court
• Parties: THE STATE v. WILLIAM S. COCKMAN.

2 Win. 95

60 N.C. 484

THE STATE

v.WILLIAM S. COCKMAN.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

December Term, 1864.

If an indictment for murder charges that A killed the deceased, and that others were present, aiding and abetting, and it is proved that the deceased was killed by some one with whom A was acting in concert, and that A was present, aiding and assisting, the jury should be instructed to find A guilty of murder.

If a challenge by the prisoner for good cause be disallowed, and the juror be challenged peremptorily by the prisoner, and the pannel is completed, the prisoner having challenged peremptorily a smaller number than twenty-three, this is no cause for a venire de novo.

A juror, challenged by the prisoner because he had formed and expressed an opinion that the prisoner was guilty, says on his examination by the Court, that he has formed and expressed an opinion to that effect, from rumor, but that he thinks he can give an impartial verdict on the trial, is adjudged by the Court to be indifferent between the parties, and is tendered to the prisoner; this is no error of which the prisoner can complain.

The case of the State vs. Benton, 2 Dev. and Bat. 196, cited and approved.

This was an indictment for the murder of John C. Howard, tried before GILLIAM, J., at Fall Term, 1864, of Moore Superior Court.

The indictment charged that the deceased, John C. Howard, was killed by the prisoner, and that others, to the jurors unknown, were present, aiding and abetting him in the act of killing.

“In forming the jury, the prisoner challenged one ??onald McDonald, and assigned for cause that he had formed and expressed an opinion that the prisoner was guilty. The juror, on his oath, stated that he had forms that opinion, but had not before expressed it; that his opinion was formed on rumor alone, that he had great confidence in the truth of the rumors he had heard, and that he was afraid they might have some influence on his judgment.” Upon his further examination he said that “he was satisfied he could render an impartial verdict upon the evidence as it might come out on the trial, uninfluenced by the rumor which he had heard.” The prisoner's counsel insisted that the juror was not indifferent; but the Court being of opinion from the examination of the juror, and from his whole demeanor, that he was indifferent, disallowed the challenge, and directed him to be tendered, when he was challenged peremptorily by the prisoner. Another juror, named Bryant Dowd, was challenged by the prisoner for the same cause. He stated, on oath, that “he had formed and expressed the opinion that the prisoner was guilty, and that he had formed it on information derived from a person who, not long after the occurrence, had been to the place where the homicide was committed, and from information derived from other persons; but that he was satisfied he could give the prisoner a fair and impartial trial, uninfluenced by anything he had heard. He was directed to be tendered, and the prisoner challenged him peremptorily.”

When the jury was completed, the prisoner had made twenty-one peremptory challenges.

On the trial, witnesses testified, that on the 6th of August before, a company of soldiers under the command of Leut. Mills, an officer of the Confederate States army, having arrested three desorters, were carrying them from Carthage in Moore eounty, to a station on the railroad, whence they might be sent on to the army. While the...