People v. Hardin
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA v. JOHN W. HARDIN
- Area
- criminal
- Panel
- Silas S. Sanderson (author)
Analysis
No analysis yet. When one exists it is a model's reading of this opinion — the rulings it reviewed, whether it agrees with the court, and the authorities it checked — shown beside the court's own disposition, never in place of it. How analyses are made.
Opinion — Sanderson
By the Court, Sanderson, J.:
The question whether the juror, Tubbs, was disqualified by reason of his having formed or expressed an unqualified opinion as to the guilt or innocence of the defendant, we are unable to reach. The challenge was for “implied bias” merely, without specifying any particular cause for which a challenge for implied bias may be interposed. The statute provides that a challenge for implied bias may be taken for nine distinct causes, (Criminal Practice Act, Sec. 347,) and that, in taking it, counsel must allege one or more of the causes so specified. (Sec. 349.) Accordingly, it has been held by this Court that a challenge interposed in general terms “for implied bias,” without a specification of any cause, may be disregarded, as incomplete, by the Court. (People v. Reynolds, 16 Cal. 130.)
The remaining points are not deemed of sufficient importance to require special notice.
Judgment and order affirmed, and remittitur allowed forthwith
Cited by
- People v. Oganesoff Crim. 4128 · 1947-10-08
- People v. McGungill No. 2,592 · 1871-07-01