State v. Melton

• Decision Date: 31 March 1908
• Citation: 109 S.W. 858,130 Mo. App. 262
• Parties: STATE v. MELTON.
• Court: Missouri Court of Appeals

109 S.W. 858

130 Mo. App. 262

STATE v. MELTON.

St. Louis Court of Appeals. Missouri.

March 31, 1908.

1. JURY — SUMMONING — SELECTION AND DRAWING OF PANEL.

The prosecuting attorney was present during the time a panel of jurors were being drawn by the judges of the county court, and on two occasions stepped aside with a judge and was consulted as to the character and qualifications of some of the persons whom the judge had selected for jurors, and several persons named by the judge were discussed with the prosecuting attorney before their names were put in the hat. It did not appear that the prosecuting attorney suggested any persons to the judges as proper persons for jurors, or that any name was erased from the list selected by the judges at his request. It also appeared that a person who was not a deputy of the county clerk, but worked in the office during a temporary absence of the clerk, drew the names of three jurors from the hat in the presence and by direction of the county court. Held, that the selection was at most irregular and not invalid.

2. INTOXICATING LIQUORS — LOCAL OPTION — PROSECUTION — EVIDENCE.

Evidence in a prosecution for violating the local option law examined, and held to sustain a conviction.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Stone County; Jno. T. Moore, Judge.

Harold Melton was convicted of violating the local option law, and appeals. Affirmed.

G. W. Thornberry, for appellant. Wm. E. Renfro, for the State.

BLAND, P. J.

On an information filed by the prosecuting attorney of Stone county, stating that local option had been adopted and was in force in said county, and that defendant had violated said law by unlawfully selling one quart of whisky, defendant was put upon trial to a jury, who found him guilty as charged.

The county court, in compliance with sections 3769, 3770, Rev. St. 1899 (Ann. St. 1906. pp. 2096, 2097), drew a panel of petit jurors for service at the term of the circuit court at which defendant was tried, which panel was certified to the clerk of the circuit court by the clerk of the county court. From this panel were drawn the jurors who found the verdict against defendant. Before the jurors were called and qualified defendant moved to quash the panel on the ground that the names of the persons put in the hat to be drawn as jurors were not selected by the judges of the county court, but by the prosecuting attorney of the county, and also that some of the names on the panel were drawn from the hat by an unauthorized person. In support of the motion defendant offered evidence showing that the prosecuting attorney was present during all the time the jurors were being drawn, that on two occasions he stepped aside with a judge of the county court and was consulted as to the character and qualifications of some of the persons whom the judge had selected for jurors, and that several persons named by the judge were discussed with the prosecuting...