{
  "id": 1316132,
  "name": "Langford v. State",
  "name_abbreviation": "Langford v. State",
  "decision_date": "1911-03-20",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "327",
  "last_page": "328",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "98 Ark. 327"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ark.",
    "id": 8808,
    "name": "Arkansas Supreme Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 34,
    "name_long": "Arkansas",
    "name": "Ark."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "69 Ark. 449",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ark.",
      "case_ids": [
        8724207
      ],
      "opinion_index": -1,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ark/69/0449-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "69 Ark. 449",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ark.",
      "case_ids": [
        8724207
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ark/69/0449-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 175,
    "char_count": 2750,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.659,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 1.4365361698601322e-07,
      "percentile": 0.6523235524542165
    },
    "sha256": "3ae67953352eddd06c669238f3b4e9eeeb4cbe1385361e5259b7a1b94d238c28",
    "simhash": "1:df585751c7661491",
    "word_count": 456
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T20:48:44.239381+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Langford v. State."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "McCulloch, C. J.\nEd Langford was convicted of the crime of manslaughter, and appeals to this court.\nOne of the assignments of error relates to the ruling of the court in overruling appellant\u2019s challenge of juror Hanks who was a justice of the peace at the time he was impaneled. The Attorney General confesses error on this assignment.\nWhen the fact was disclosed, on the examination of this juror, that he was a justice of the peace, appellant challenged him for cause, and the court overruled the challenge. Appellant then peremptorily challenged the juror, and thereafter, in impaneling the jury, exhausted all of his peremptory challenges.\nThe statute provides that \u201cwhenever any juryman shall be presented for examination in impaneling any jury, it shall be a ground of peremptory challenge that said juryman is a postmaster, justice of the peace or county officer.\u201d Kirby\u2019s Dig. \u00a7 4537-\nThis court, in construing the statute, said: \u201cWe construe this to mean that the fact that a justice of the peace is- a juror is cause for challenge. Of course, any juror can be peremptorily challenged; and unless the statute means that the fact that a juror is a justice of the peace is a disqualification if the defendant desires to avail himself of the fact, then it is meaningless nonsense.\u201d Terrell v. State, 69 Ark. 449.\nThere are other assignments of error relating to alleged disqualification of other jurors and to improper argument of counsel for the State; but as the error indicated above calls for a reversal, and the other matter may not occur at another trial, it is unnecessary to pass on them.\nReversed and remanded.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "McCulloch, C. J."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "/. T. Bullock, Brooks, Hays & Martin and Bullock & Davis, for appellant.",
      "Hal L. Norzvood, Attorney General, and William H. Rector, assistant, for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Langford v. State.\nOpinion delivered March 20, 1911.\nJury \u2014 competency of justice of the peace. \u2014 -Kirby's Digest, \u00a7 4337, providing that \u201cwhenever any juryman shall be presented for examination in impaneling any jury it shall be a ground of peremptory challenge that said juryman is a postmaster, justice of the peace or county officer,\u201d means that it shall be ground for challenge that one presented for examination as to his qualifications as juror fills either one of the positions mentioned.\nAppeal from Pope Circuit Court; /. H. Basham, Judge;\nreversed.\n/. T. Bullock, Brooks, Hays & Martin and Bullock & Davis, for appellant.\nThe juror Hanks, being a justice of the peace, was not suoject to jury duty; the court therefore erred in overruling appellant\u2019s challenge of him for cause, and in requiring appellant to exhaust one of his peremptory challenges on him. Kirby\u2019s Dig. \u00a7 4537; 69 Ark. 449; Id. 323.\nHal L. Norzvood, Attorney General, and William H. Rector, assistant, for appellee.\nAppellee confesses error as to retention of the juror Planks and requiring appellant to exhaust a peremptory challenge upon him."
  },
  "file_name": "0327-01",
  "first_page_order": 347,
  "last_page_order": 348
}