State v. Douglass
| Decision Date | 30 June 1869 |
| Court | North Carolina Supreme Court |
| Parties | STATE v. BENJAMIN DOUGLASS. |
Objection to the manner of summoning the grand jury, can only be taken before trial; and such objection to the petit jury or special venire, by challenging the array.
Judgments can be arrested only for some matter which appears, or for the omission of some matter which ought to appear, upon the record.
( State v. Martin, 2 Ire. 101, State v. Davis, 2 Ire. 153, State v. Underwood, 6 Ire. 96, State v. Barfield, 8 Ire. 344, State v. Ward, 2 Hawks 443, State v. Patrick, 3 Jon. 443, State v. Roberts, 2 Dev. & Bat. 540; cited and approved.)
MURDER, tried before Buxton, J., at Spring Term 1869, of the Superior Court of MOORE.
The jury having returned a verdict of guilty, there was a rule upon the State to show cause why a new trial should not be granted for the following reason, viz:
That K. H. Worthy, who as Sheriff of Moore county summoned the regular jury, grand and petit, for the term as well as the special venire in the case, was not the lawful Sheriff of the county of Moore, being disqualified under the XIV Amendment of the Constitution of the United States. (See Worthy v. Barrett, 63 N.C. 199.)
Rule discharged; Motion in arrest of judgement for the same grounds as those taken for a new trial; Motion overruled; Judgment and Appeal.
Attorney General, for the State .No counsel contra.
We have examined this case with the care which its importance demands, and have considered not only the points made upon the trial below, but have looked to the record to see if anything more could be suggested in favorem vitæ. We have found no error in the record.
Let us consider the points relied upon by the prisoner.
After a verdict of guilty, the prisoner obtained a rule upon the State to show cause why a new trial should not be granted, for the reason that K. H. Worthy, the person who, as Sheriff of Moore county, summoned the regular jury, grand and petit, for said term of the Court, as well as the special venire in this case, was not the lawful Sheriff of the county of Moore.
The facts in regard to the office of Sheriff are fully set forth in the statement of the case made by his Honor, the presiding Judge. But we are relieved from their consideration and from all inquiries as to the validity of the acts of the Sheriff in regard to the grand jury which found the bill, and the petit jury which tried this case. Whether he was Sheriff de facto, or de jure, it is immaterial to inquire; for the objection, if it ever had any force, comes too late. Objection to the grand jury can only be taken before plea in chief, or at all events before trial. State v. Martin, 2 Ire. 101, State v. Davis, 2 Ire. 153, State v. Underwood, 6 Ire. 96, State v. Barfield, 8 Ire. 344.
If the prisoner had wished to...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Young v. Southern Mica Co. of N. C.
...See State v. Crawford, 3 N.C. 298 (juror not a freeholder); State v. Patrick, 1856, 48 N.C. 443 (juror not a slave owner); State v. Douglass, 63 N.C. 500 (Sheriff who summoned jurors disqualified for having served as Sheriff during War between States); State v. White, 68 N.C. 158 (juror a n......
-
State v. Anderson
... ... 726] until ... after he had been convicted and sentenced to death. He waived ... any right to question the competency of the special venire as ... a whole by proceeding to trial without interposing a ... challenge to the array. State v. Douglass, 63 N.C ... 500; State v. Kirksey, 227 N.C. 445, 42 S.E.2d 613 ... He did not object to the jurors in question as individuals by ... challenges to the polls. State v. Kirksey. supra; State ... v. Koritz, 227 N.C. 552, 43 S.E.2d 77. Besides, the ... petit jury was obtained from the original ... ...
-
State v. Kirksey
... ... 570, 26 S.E. 697; State v. Levy, supra; State v ... Dixon, 215 N.C. 438, 2 S.E.2d 371 ... If ... defendant had wished to take advantage of his objection to ... the petit jury and special venire, he should have done so by ... challenging the array. State v. Douglass, 63 N.C ... 500, and before entering upon the trial of his case ... ... Objections to individual jurors are made by challenges to the ... polls. These challenges are of two kinds--peremptory and for ... cause. Defendant had exhausted the number of peremptory ... ...
-
State v. Anderson
...to question the competency of the special venire as a whole by proceeding to trial without interposing a challenge to the array. State v. Douglass, 63 N.C. 500; State v. Kirksey, 227 N.C. 445, 42 S.E.2d 613. He did not object to the jurors in question as individuals by challenges to the pol......