Walker v. State, 61539
| Decision Date | 24 June 1981 |
| Docket Number | No. 61539,61539 |
| Parties | WALKER v. The STATE. |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
Percy J. Blount, Augusta, for appellant.
Sam B. Sibley Jr., Dist. Atty., W. Leon Barfield, Asst. Dist. Atty., for appellee.
Jerry Lynwood Walker was indicted on a charge of armed robbery but was convicted of robbery by intimidation. Following publication of the verdict, appellant requested that the jury be polled individually. Upon each juror being asked if the verdict published were his verdict, all responded affirmatively save one who announced that he was not sure. Appellant moved for a mistrial; the state requested that the jury be allowed to return to the jury room to deliberate the verdict further. The trial court overruled appellant's motion for mistrial and instructed the jury as follows: The jury later returned a verdict of guilty of robbery by intimidation and unanimously affirmed that verdict upon being polled.
1. Appellant contends that the trial court erred in overruling his motion for mistrial. This contention is without merit. Macon R. & Light Co. v. Barnes, 121 Ga. 443, 449, 49 S.E. 282 (1904); Hinton v. State, 223 Ga. 174(4), 154 S.E.2d 246 (1967), rev'd on other grounds sub nom. Anderson v. Georgia, 390 U.S. 206, 88 S.Ct. 902, 19 L.Ed. 1039 (1968). The trial court correctly followed this procedure.
2. Appellant also enumerates as error the charge set forth above which directed the jury to further deliberate their verdict. Appellant contends that this charge failed to caution the jurors against surrendering an opinion because of an honest difference of opinion with another juror for the sake of reaching a unanimous verdict. This contention has been decided adversely to appellant in Wilson v. State, 145 Ga.App. 315(4c), 244 S.E.2d 355 (1978).
Appellant also contends that the charge "expresses the opinion of the Court that a hung jury should not be had in this case." In Yancy v. State, 173 Ga. 685(5), 160 S.E. 867 (1931), the following language was given by the trial court after the jury had deliberated for several hours: "I call your attention to the fact that mistrials are a serious matter, and in many cases hinder justice." Id. at 690, 160 S.E. 867. The Supreme Court held that such language ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Creed v. State
...not rejecting the verdict and ordering the jury to deliberate further after Rosser's initial response. He relies on Walker v. State, 159 Ga.App. 50, 282 S.E.2d 697 (1981), in which this Court held that when a juror announced that he was "not sure" that the published verdict was his verdict,......
-
Scruggs v. State
...the conclusion of the poll of the jury and premised upon the alleged lack of unanimity cited in Division 1, supra. Walker v. State, 159 Ga.App. 50(1), 282 S.E.2d 697 (1981). 3. Appellant's third enumeration asserts as error two allegedly inconsistent findings resulting from the same facts. ......
-
Hunter v. State
...has been reached, the proper remedy is for the trial court to direct the jury to retire for further deliberations. Walker v. State, 159 Ga.App. 50(1), 282 S.E.2d 697 (1981). There is no requirement that the poll be continued after one juror's response has demonstrated a lack of unanimity. T......
-
Larry v. State
...the jury to continue its deliberations. Hunter v. State, 202 Ga.App. 195, 198(5), 413 S.E.2d 526 (1991), citing Walker v. State, 159 Ga.App. 50(1), 282 S.E.2d 697 (1981). Approximately thirteen minutes later, the court received word that the juror in question and another juror wished to be ......