State v. Waters

Citation62 Mo. 196
PartiesTHE STATE OF MISSOURI, Appellant, v. MEREDITH WATERS, Respondent.
Decision Date31 January 1876
CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of Missouri

Appeal from St. Louis Court of Appeals.

Normile, Ct. Att'y, for Appellant, cited State vs. Klinger, 46 Mo., 224; State vs. Hays, 23 Mo., 287.

McKee & McFarland, for Respondent, cited Wagn. Stat., 1102, §§ 7, 8; State vs. Klinger, 46 Mo., 224; State vs. Buckner, 25 Mo., 167, 169, 170, 171; State vs. McCarron, 51 Mo., 27, 28; State vs. Holme, 54 Mo., 153, 166; Wagn. Stat., 800, § 24; Taylor vs. Pac. R. R. Co., 45 Cal., 323; State vs. Scroggins, 37 Cal., 677; Cooley vs. State, 38 Tex., 636; Gladdin vs. State, 13 Fla., 623.

WAGNER, Judge, delivered the opinion of the court.

The only question in this case relates to the action of the circuit court in impaneling a jury for the trial of the cause.

The record states, that on the 6th day of October, 1875, the defendant, being brought into court, waived a formal arraignment and put in the plea of “not guilty,” and agreed that the cause might be set down for trial on the 8th day of the month. The defendant, by his attorneys, filed a written motion on the 7th, the next day, requiring that a panel of forty competent jurymen should be furnished forty-eight hours before the day of trial. In compliance with the motion, on the same day, the 7th, a list of forty jurors was furnished, and on the next day, the 8th, the cause was called for trial, and the defendant declared himself not ready, because the panel of forty jurymen had not been delivered to him forty-eight hours before the day of trial. Defendant's objection was overruled by the court, and he excepted. Immediately afterwards, on the same day, the court ordered the clerk to deliver to the defendant a list of thirty-two qualified jurymen, from which to select a jury, the State having waived its challenges, from which order of the court, compelling the defendant to select a jury from the list containing only thirty-two qualified jurors, the defendant excepted.

As the defendant was indicted for murder in the first degree, a full panel of competent or qualified jurors would be forty, as the State was entitled to eight peremptory challenges, and the defendant to twenty. The statute declares that there shall be summoned and returned, in every criminal cause, a number of qualified jurors equal to the number of peremptory challenges and twelve in addition; and no party shall be required to make peremptory challenges before a panel of such number of competent jurors shall be obtained. (Wagn. Stat., 1102, § 7.)

Where a statute is made, as in the above instance, granting an important privilege for the benefit of the defendant, he may waive it if he will (State vs. Klinger, 46 Mo., 224) but if he insists upon it, it is the duty of the court to conform their action to it. If the party makes no objection he may be...

To continue reading

Request your trial
36 cases
  • State v. Brown
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • March 23, 1904
    ... ... had been made, the voluntary action of the court shows that ... the objection would have been sustained. The defendant having ... failed to object, and except to this matter in the trial ... court, can not raise the question here. State v ... McCollum, 119 Mo. 496; State v. Waters, 62 Mo ... 196; State v. Nocton, 121 Mo. 537; State v ... Higgins, 124 Mo. 640; State v. Foster, 115 Mo ... 448; State v. Rapp, 142 Mo. 443. (4) Witness S. H ... Woodson testifies that the general reputation of the ... defendant in the community where he lived was good. On ... ...
  • Finley v. Farrar
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • May 4, 1943
    ...State v. McCarron, 51 Mo. 27; Norvell v. Deval, 50 Mo. 272; Cunningham v. Prusansky, 59 Mo.App. 498; State v. Waters, 1 Mo.App. 7; State v. Waters, 62 Mo. 196. (13) A person alleged to be insane has the right to a by jury in the probate court. In re Moynihan, 63 S.W.2d 410, l. c. 418, citin......
  • State v. Bryant
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • November 28, 1887
    ... ... the exception has no operative effect if they have been such ... as to prejudice or bias his mind." As the defendant was ... entitled to a full panel of qualified jurors, before he was ... required to make his peremptory challenges ( State v ... McCannon , 51 Mo. 27; State v. Waters , 62 Mo ... 196; State v. Davis , 66 Mo. 684), it, therefore, ... [6 S.W. 105] ... becomes important to learn whether there was a full general ... panel from which to make selection. Hypothetical opinions ... entertained or expressed by a juror do not, as a rule, ... disqualify. 2 Graham ... ...
  • Finley v. Farrar
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • May 4, 1943
    ...v. McCarron, 51 Mo. 27; Norvell v. Deval, 50 Mo. 272; Cunningham v. Prusansky, 59 Mo. App. 498; State v. Waters, 1 Mo. App. 7; State v. Waters, 62 Mo. 196. (13) A person alleged to be insane has the right to a trial by jury in the probate court. In re Moynihan, 63 S.W. (2d) 410, l.c. 418, c......
  • 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