State v. Willis
| Decision Date | 15 June 1972 |
| Docket Number | No. 52066,52066 |
| Citation | 264 So.2d 590,262 La. 636 |
| Parties | STATE of Louisiana v. Willie D. 'Calvin' WILLIS. |
| Court | Louisiana Supreme Court |
Paul Henry Kidd, Robert P. McLeod, Monroe, George M. Strickler, Jr., New Orleans, for defendant-appellant.
William J. Guste, Jr., Atty. Gen., Harry H. Howard, Asst. Atty. Gen., Hal R. Henderson, Dist. Atty., for plaintiff-appellee.
By Bill of Information, the State charged Willie D. 'Calvin' Willis with aggravated criminal damage to property in violation of R.S. 14:55. After trial, the jury returned a verdict of guilty. The judge sentenced the defendant to a term of ten (10) years in the Louisiana State Penitentiary. 1
The defendant has appealed, relying upon seven bills of exceptions reserved in the trial court. The first two bills raise the identical issues of whether or not the defendant's motions to quash the petit jury venire and for a change of venue were erroneously overruled as was presented and decided in State v. Curry, 262 La. 280, 263 So.2d 36 (1972). For the reasons there set forth, we find no error.
Bills of exceptions Nos. 3 and 4 attacking the constitutionality of state statute, La.C.Cr.P. Art. 627, and the denial of defendant's motion for the production and inspection of Grand Jury minutes, respectively, also raise identical issues as were presented and decided in State v. Curry, 262 La. 280, 264 So.2d 583, this day handed down. For the reasons there set forth, we likewise find no error.
Bills of exceptions Nos. 5, 6, and 7 were taken by defense counsel to the trial court's rulings on the challenges for cause of three prospective jurors, Lawrence Rinnicker, Thomas Coleman and N. J. Kendrick, thereby requiring the defense to exercise their peremptory challenges. Lawrence Rinnicker and N. J. Kendrick were challenged for cause by virtue of being hard of hearing. However, the trial court's determination based upon its own examination, that both Mr. Rinnicker's and Mr. Kendrick's hearing was not so impaired as to render them incapable of serving in the case, satisfies this Court that the veniremen were not physicially infirm pursuant to La.C.Cr.P. Art. 401(4). State v. Reed, 206 La. 143, 19 So.2d 28 (1944).
In addition, Mr. Kendrick's participation was challenged because of his ecomonic relationship with various witnesses in the case. Similarly the defense counsel challenged Thomas Coleman because of his role as an insurance salesman to some of the witnesses and victims. In making his argument, ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Welcome
...320 So.2d 895 (La.1975); State v. O'Connor, 320 So.2d 188 (La.1975); State v. Frazier, 283 So.2d 261 (La.1978); State v. Willis, 262 La. 636, 264 So.2d 590 (1972), Cf. State v. Claiborne, 397 So.2d 486 (La.1981). A trial judge's refusal to excuse a prospective juror for cause is not an abus......
-
State v. Passman
... ... State v. Weathers, 320 So.2d 895 (La.1975); State v. O'Conner, 320 So.2d 188 (La.1975); State v. Frazier, 283 So.2d 261 (La.1973); State v. Willis, 262 La. 636, 264 So.2d 590 (1972) ... A trial judge's refusal to excuse a prospective juror for cause is not an abuse of his discretion, notwithstanding that the juror has voiced an opinion seemingly prejudicial to the defense, where subsequently, on further inquiry or ... ...
-
State v. Mills
...suffering from a physical infirmity is competent to serve as a juror. State v. Reed, 206 La. 143, 19 So.2d 28 (1944); State v. Willis, 262 La. 636, 264 So.2d 590 (1972). The trial judge questioned Ms. Riffe about her hearing and was satisfied she was competent to serve. After the trial judg......
-
93-718 La.App. 3 Cir. 10/5/94, State v. Dugar
...absent an abuse of discretion. State v. Freeman, 539 So.2d 739 (La.App. 3d Cir.) writ denied, 543 So.2d 17 (La.1989); State v. Willis, 262 La. 636, 264 So.2d 590 (1972). We find no abuse of discretion by the trial judge. This assignment of error lacks SPEEDY TRIAL Defendant first contends h......