State v. Marvin Davis., No. 4511.

CourtSupreme Court of West Virginia
Writing for the CourtMILLER.
Citation91 W.Va. 241
PartiesState v. Marvin Davis.
Decision Date16 May 1922
Docket NumberNo. 4511.

91 W.Va. 241

State
v.
Marvin Davis.

No. 4511

Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia.

Submitted May 9, 1922,
Decided May 16, 1922.


[91 W.Va. 241]

Jury Verdict will be Set Aside and Judgment Reversed Where

Some of the Veniremen Were Disqualified.

Upon the trial of one indicted for stealing the goods of a railway company, the employees of such company are prima facie disqualified to be placed upon the panel of twenty required by law, or to sit on the jury of twelve selected therefrom tot try the case; and the verdict of a jury so impaneled and constituted in whole or in part of such disqualified veniremen, if objected to, will be set aside, and the judgment thereon reversed.

Error to Circuit Court, Summers County. Marvin Davis was convicted of stealing goods, and he brings error.

Reversed, and remanded.

Wm. II. Sawyers and T. J. Lilly, for plaintiff in error. E. T. England, Attorney General, and R. Dennis Steed, Assistant Attorney General, for the State.

Miller, Judge:

The defendant was indicted, tried and convicted of stealing certain goods, the property of the Chesapeak and Ohio Railway Company, of the value of more than twenty dollars, and was sentenced to the penitentiary for the period of two years.

The only error urged or argued here by defendant's counsel is that the court below overruled his objection to six of the panel of jurors and allowed three of them, admittedly

[91 W.Va. 242]

employees of the Chesapeake and Ohio Railway Company, to he sworn to try the case, and who did sit on the trial thereof and participate in the verdict against him.

What the evidence taken on their voir dire, if any, may have shown regarding the other qualifications of these jurors the record does not show; but if the main objection is good, the other facts become immaterial.

In the recent case of State v. Dushman, 79 W. Va. 747, the defendant objected to employees of the railway company being included in the panel of twenty jurors from which he was called upon to exercise his right of peremptory challenge. We decided in that case that the error was fatal to the trial, though none of the employees of the railway company were chosen or sat as jurors on the trial, because under the rules of the common law defendant was...

To continue reading

Request your trial
5 practice notes
  • White v. Lock, No. 16401
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of West Virginia
    • 26 Junio 1985
    ...268, 43 S.E.2d 219 (1947); nor was the employer in any sense a victim. State v. Dushman, 79 W.Va. 747, 91 S.E. 809 (1917); State v. Davis, 91 W.Va. 241, 112 S.E. 414 " 'The true test as to whether a juror is qualified to serve on the panel is whether without bias or prejudice he can render ......
  • State v. Beckett, No. 15887
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of West Virginia
    • 16 Diciembre 1983
    ...See also State v. Kilpatrick, 158 W.Va. 289, 210 S.E.2d 480 (1974); State v. West, 157 W.Va. 209, 200 S.E.2d 859 (1973); State v. Davis, 91 W.Va. 241, 112 S.E. 414 It should be noted that while the common law disqualifications are in the main rather explicit, they are not without some ambig......
  • Murphy v. Cole, No. 32590.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • 18 Diciembre 1935
    ...N.C. 429, 431, 74 S.E. 918; Georgia Railroad & Banking Company v. Tice, 124 Ga. 459, 465, 52 S.E. 916, 4 Ann. Cas. 200; State v. Davis, 91 W. Va. 241, 242, 112 S.E. 414; Peklenuk v. Isle Royale Copper Co., 187 Mich. 644, 647, 153 N.W. 1068; Hufnagle v. Delaware & Hudson Company, 227 Pa. 476......
  • State v. Wilcox, No. 14658
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of West Virginia
    • 19 Enero 1982
    ...precise point in our research. The most similar West Virginia cases are distinguishable. In State v. Dushman, supra, and State v. Davis, 91 W.Va. 241, 112 S.E. 414 (1922), employees of companies which had been robbed were permitted to serve on juries trying persons for stealing and for buyi......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
5 cases
  • White v. Lock, No. 16401
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of West Virginia
    • 26 Junio 1985
    ...268, 43 S.E.2d 219 (1947); nor was the employer in any sense a victim. State v. Dushman, 79 W.Va. 747, 91 S.E. 809 (1917); State v. Davis, 91 W.Va. 241, 112 S.E. 414 " 'The true test as to whether a juror is qualified to serve on the panel is whether without bias or prejudice he can render ......
  • State v. Beckett, No. 15887
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of West Virginia
    • 16 Diciembre 1983
    ...See also State v. Kilpatrick, 158 W.Va. 289, 210 S.E.2d 480 (1974); State v. West, 157 W.Va. 209, 200 S.E.2d 859 (1973); State v. Davis, 91 W.Va. 241, 112 S.E. 414 It should be noted that while the common law disqualifications are in the main rather explicit, they are not without some ambig......
  • Murphy v. Cole, No. 32590.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • 18 Diciembre 1935
    ...N.C. 429, 431, 74 S.E. 918; Georgia Railroad & Banking Company v. Tice, 124 Ga. 459, 465, 52 S.E. 916, 4 Ann. Cas. 200; State v. Davis, 91 W. Va. 241, 242, 112 S.E. 414; Peklenuk v. Isle Royale Copper Co., 187 Mich. 644, 647, 153 N.W. 1068; Hufnagle v. Delaware & Hudson Company, 227 Pa. 476......
  • State v. Wilcox, No. 14658
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of West Virginia
    • 19 Enero 1982
    ...precise point in our research. The most similar West Virginia cases are distinguishable. In State v. Dushman, supra, and State v. Davis, 91 W.Va. 241, 112 S.E. 414 (1922), employees of companies which had been robbed were permitted to serve on juries trying persons for stealing and for buyi......
  • 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