State v. Reed, No. 36703.
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of Iowa |
| Writing for the Court | FAVILLE |
| Citation | 208 N.W. 308,201 Iowa 1352 |
| Decision Date | 09 April 1926 |
| Docket Number | No. 36703. |
| Parties | STATE v. REED. |
201 Iowa 1352
208 N.W. 308
STATE
v.
REED.
No. 36703.a1
Supreme Court of Iowa.
April 9, 1926.
Appeal from District Court, Harrison County; J. S. Dewell, Judge.
The defendant was indicted, tried, and convicted of the crime of murder in the first degree, and appeals. Reversed.
Stevens, J., dissenting.
[208 N.W. 308]
R. J. Organ, of Missouri Valley, and Wm. P. Welch, of Logan, for appellant.
Ben J. Gibson, Atty. Gen., and Neill Garrett, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
FAVILLE, J.
In this case certain jurors were challenged upon the voir dire, who
[208 N.W. 309]
showed from their answers that they had formed opinions as to the guilt or innocence of the defendant. We quote the following, which is the entire record, regarding one of these jurors:
“I have heard this case talked about. The party who talked with me stated that he was telling the facts. I also read something in the paper. The article that I read purported to state facts in connection with the shooting; that is, how it occurred and who did it. The article in the newspaper corresponded with the statement made to me by the party who talked to me about the case. From the talk that I had and the article I read I formed an opinion which has been fixed in my mind, and I still have that opinion. It is such an opinion as would require evidence to the contrary to remove. I would have to hear evidence from some witnesses different from what I have already heard before I would be willing to change that opinion. If selected as a juror, I would enter the jury box with that opinion in my mind, and that opinion would remain during the trial from the beginning to the end, unless I heard evidence to the contrary. If no evidence contrary to that opinion were introduced, I don't see how I could help from carrying that opinion along during the trial. I don't think that I could enter the trial of this case, knowing what I do about it, and still give the benefit of the presumption of innocence to the defendant.
Mr. Organ: Juror is challenged for cause, for the reason that he claimed to have a fixed opinion as to the guilt or innocence of the defendant.
Challenge overruled. Defendant excepts.”
[1] This juror was clearly disqualified under the statute (Code 1924, § 13830), of which section paragraph 11 provides that one ground for challenge in a criminal case is because of the juror--
“having formed or expressed such an opinion as to the guilt or innocence of the prisoner as would prevent him from rendering a true verdict upon the evidence submitted on the trial.”
The order overruling the challenge cannot be defended. The error is not cured by reason of the fact that appellant exercised his peremptory challenge...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Jonas, No. 15-1560
...under state law. In State v. Reed, we considered a case where a potential juror had preconceived views of the defendant's guilt. 201 Iowa 1352, 1353, 208 N.W. 308, 309 (1926), overruled by Neuendorf, 509 N.W.2d at 746. Reed challenged the potential juror for cause under the then-applicable ......
-
State v. Lahmon, No. 45232.
...the instant case.” The foregoing pronouncement of this court was expressly followed in the case of State v. Hatcher, supra, 201 Iowa 939, 208 N.W. 308, wherein we state: “The state argues, however, that the necessary corroboration in this case is found in the fact that appellants had an opp......
-
State v. Rhodes, No. 44129.
...upon the question of disqualification for such reason. The testimony here is quite different than that presented in the former appeal, 201 Iowa 1352, 208 N.W. 308. There the juror testified that he did not think that he could enter the trial of the case knowing what he did about it and stil......
-
State v. Wheelock, No. 41521.
...before she had even heard any of the evidence in the case. In the case of State v. Reed, reported in 201 Iowa, 1352, at page 1354, 208 N. W. 308, 309, this court said: “Appellant herein exhausted all of his peremptory challenges. Under such circumstances, appellant is not required to show t......
-
State v. Jonas, No. 15-1560
...under state law. In State v. Reed, we considered a case where a potential juror had preconceived views of the defendant's guilt. 201 Iowa 1352, 1353, 208 N.W. 308, 309 (1926), overruled by Neuendorf, 509 N.W.2d at 746. Reed challenged the potential juror for cause under the then-applicable ......
-
State v. Lahmon, No. 45232.
...the instant case.” The foregoing pronouncement of this court was expressly followed in the case of State v. Hatcher, supra, 201 Iowa 939, 208 N.W. 308, wherein we state: “The state argues, however, that the necessary corroboration in this case is found in the fact that appellants had an opp......
-
State v. Rhodes, No. 44129.
...upon the question of disqualification for such reason. The testimony here is quite different than that presented in the former appeal, 201 Iowa 1352, 208 N.W. 308. There the juror testified that he did not think that he could enter the trial of the case knowing what he did about it and stil......
-
State v. Wheelock, No. 41521.
...before she had even heard any of the evidence in the case. In the case of State v. Reed, reported in 201 Iowa, 1352, at page 1354, 208 N. W. 308, 309, this court said: “Appellant herein exhausted all of his peremptory challenges. Under such circumstances, appellant is not required to show t......