Staten v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Staten v. State

80 S.E. 853, 14 Ga. App. 288, 1914 Ga. App. LEXIS 218

Court of Appeals of Georgia·Decided January 27, 1914·No. 5053·Published

Opinion

Russell, C. J.

The only assignment of error in this case depended upon the consideration of the competency of a juror; and, the Supreme Court having decided, in answer to the question certified to it by this court, and upon a review of the rulings in Cohron v. State, 20 Ga. 760, Thomas v. State, 27 Ga. 287, Burroughs v. State, 33 Ga. 408, Doyal v. State, 70 Ga. 142, and Carter v. State, 75 Ga. 750, that the fact that a petit juror in a criminal case is over sixty years of age is not ground for peremptory challenge (Staten v. State, 141 Ga. 82, 80 S. E. 850), the trial judge did not err in overruling the motion for a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Russell, C. J.

The only assignment of error in this case depended upon the consideration of the competency of a juror; and, the Supreme Court having decided, in answer to the question certified to it by this court, and upon a review of the rulings in Cohron v. State, 20 Ga. 760, Thomas v. State, 27 Ga. 287, Burroughs v. State, 33 Ga. 408, Doyal v. State, 70 Ga. 142, and Carter v. State, 75 Ga. 750, that the fact that a petit juror in a criminal case is over sixty years of age is not ground for peremptory challenge (Staten v. State, 141 Ga. 82, 80 S. E. 850), the trial judge did not err in overruling the motion for a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

Staten v. State, 80 S.E. 853, 14 Ga. App. 288, 1914 Ga. App. LEXIS 218 (Ga. Ct. App. 1914).

Pincite

80 S.E. 853 (Staten v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related