{ "id": 1561071, "name": "Tisdale v. State", "name_abbreviation": "Tisdale v. State", "decision_date": "1915-10-25", "docket_number": "", "first_page": "470", "last_page": "471", "citations": [ { "type": "official", "cite": "120 Ark. 470" } ], "court": { "name_abbreviation": "Ark.", "id": 8808, "name": "Arkansas Supreme Court" }, "jurisdiction": { "id": 34, "name_long": "Arkansas", "name": "Ark." }, "cites_to": [ { "cite": "101 Ark. 443", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "Ark.", "case_ids": [ 1311095 ], "opinion_index": -1, "case_paths": [ "/ark/101/0443-01" ] }, { "cite": "102 Ark. 183", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "Ark.", "weight": 2, "pin_cites": [ { "page": "322" } ], "opinion_index": -1 }, { "cite": "104 Ark. 606", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "Ark.", "case_ids": [ 1350642 ], "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/ark/104/0606-01" ] }, { "cite": "103 Ark. 21", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "Ark.", "case_ids": [ 1352036 ], "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/ark/103/0021-01" ] }, { "cite": "102 Ark. 182", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "Ark.", "opinion_index": 0 }, { "cite": "101 Ark. 450", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "Ark.", "opinion_index": 0 } ], "analysis": { "cardinality": 230, "char_count": 3655, "ocr_confidence": 0.408, "pagerank": { "raw": 9.807490565964836e-08, "percentile": 0.5329579060400819 }, "sha256": "9107de8aded27203192dbb78debca33038f9bdfe2f6038d5013a1016858db231", "simhash": "1:4ae33560d3d79994", "word_count": 670 }, "last_updated": "2023-07-14T19:47:48.789730+00:00", "provenance": { "date_added": "2019-08-29", "source": "Harvard", "batch": "2018" }, "casebody": { "judges": [], "parties": [ "Tisdale v. State." ], "opinions": [ { "text": "Kirby, J.\nThis appeal is from a conviction for the unlawful sale of intoxicating liquors, 'and it is insisted for reversal that the court erred in not excusing the juror, Sid Mays, for cause.\nThe record discloses that eighteen jurors were examined and declared qualified, Mays \u00a1among the number, and from this list the names \u00a1of three jurors each were struck by the State .and the defendant.\nOn his voir dire, the juror stated:\nQ. You say you have heard of the case?\nA. I heard of the case here in the justice of the peace court.\nQ. Did you hear \u00a1any \u00a1of the witnesses?\nA. No, sir; those to whom I talked, had heard the witnesses, .and they detailed the facts in the case to me, as they heard it.\nQ. They detailed the facts to you?\nA. Yes, sir.\nQ. From that did you form an opinion as to the guilt or innocence of the defendant? '\nA. Yes, sir; I suppose Tdid.\nThe Court. If you were \u00a1selected as a juror in this case could you 'and would you go in to the jury box and lay aside those things you might have heard, this hearsay, 'and efface from your mind any opinion you might have formed from what you have heard, and try this defendant according to the evidence as \u00a1detailed to you by the witness here from the stand, and the law as given you by the court, disregarding all you might have heard, or opinions you may have formed?\nA. Yes, sir; I would try \u00a1him according to the law and the evidence.\nThe Court. The juror is qualified:\nThe examination of the juror clearly shows that he had no fixed opinion of the guilt or innocence of the defendant, notwithstanding he said he had talked with -some persons who had heard the witnesses testify in the trial. He was not \u00a1certain that he had \u00a1an opinion even, answering the question whether he had formed an opinion from hearing the facts detailed by those who had heard the other witnesses, \u201cYes, I suppose I did.\u201d He stated he could go in to the jury box \u00a1and give 'the defendant a fair and impartial trial according to the law \u00a1and the evidence as detailed \u00a1by the witnesses upon the stand, disregarding what he had heard about the case \u00a1and any opinion he might have formed and that he would do so.\nThereupon the court declared him competent and not subject to challenge for cause and committed no error in doing so.\nThe juror only supposed .that he had \u00a1an opinion, did not \u00a1say that it was \u00a1definite 'and fixed, or would require evidence to remove it, nor was. he \u00a1asked \u00a1any further questions that might have disclosed a state \u00a1of mind that would have rendered him incompetent as a juror-, if such was the fact. McElvain v. State, 101 Ark. 450; Collins v. State, 102 Ark. 182; Jackson v. State, 103 Ark. 21; Hamer v. State, 104 Ark. 606.\nThe judgment is 'affirmed.", "type": "majority", "author": "Kirby, J." } ], "attorneys": [ "Bratton & Bratton, for appellant.", "Wallace Davis, Attorney General, and Jno. P. Streepey, Assistant for appellee." ], "corrections": "", "head_matter": "Tisdale v. State.\nOpinion delivered October 25, 1915.\nJtjeoe- \u2014 opinion\u2014qualification.\u2014In a OTiminal prosecution, a juror when examined stated that he had heard of the case and supposed that he had an opinion, tout that he could go into the juiry box and give the defendant a fair and impartial trial according to the law, and under the evidence as detailed by the witnesses upon the stand, disregarding what he had heard about the case and any opinion that he might have formed. Held, the action of the trial court in declaring the juror qualified was proper.\nAppeal from Cleveland Circuit Court; Turner Butler, Judge;\naffirmed.\nBratton & Bratton, for appellant.\n1. The juror Mays isbould have been excused. He had formed an opinion. 102 Ark. 183; 69 Id. 322.\nWallace Davis, Attorney General, and Jno. P. Streepey, Assistant for appellee.\nThe court did not err as to the juror, Mays. 101 Ark. 443; 103 Id. 21; 85 Id. 64; 91 Id. 582. '" }, "file_name": "0470-01", "first_page_order": 494, "last_page_order": 495 }