TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Glass v. State

Glass v. the State

Glass v. State, 136 S.E.2d 199 (Ga. Ct. App. 1964)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Court of Appeals of Georgia · State Appellate Courts
Decided
March 13, 1964
Docket
No. 40628
Judges
Nichols, Hall, Russell
Citations
136 S.E.2d 199109 Ga. App. 3531964 Ga. App. LEXIS 869

Opinion — Nichols

Nichols, Presiding Judge.

The defendant was tried and convicted under an accusation charging her with pointing a gun at another. Before pleading, the defendant filed a challenge to the array of the traverse jury based upon the ground that the systematic, arbitrary and deliberate exclusion of members of the Negro race from serving as jurors in such court was a violation of the defendant’s rights “as provided for under the equal protection clause and due process clause” of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. After hearing evidence the trial court overruled the challenge to the array and proceeded with the trial of the main case which resulted in the conviction of the defendant. Thereafter, the defendant’s amended motion for new trial was overruled and by writ of error the adverse judgments were appealed to the Supreme Court. The case was transferred to this court when the Supreme Court determined that the case involved “The application of unquestioned and unambiguous provisions of the Constitution to a given state of facts.”

Glass v. State, 219 Ga. 565 ( 134 SE2d 813 ).

The solicitor of the trial court testified on cross examination that he had not seen a Negro serve on the juries in such court over a period of twelve years, and the clerk testified on cross examination that names of prospective Negro jurors on the jury list cany a designation of their racial identity.

Held:

Under the decision of the Supreme Court of the United States in Avery v. Georgia, 345 U. S. 559 (73 SC 891, 97 LE 1244), the defendant made out a prima facie case of racial discrimination and the burden was upon the State to overcome such *354 prima facie case. No evidence was introduced by the State and the trial court erred in overruling the challenge to the array. The further proceedings were nugatory.

Decided March 13, 1964.

C.

B. King, for plaintiff in error.

Marcus B. Calhoun, Solicitor, contra.

Judgment reversed.

Hall and Russell, JJ., concur.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1964: 319642026peak 1964 · 3

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Allen v. State137 S.E.2d 711 (Ga. Ct. App. 1964)
  2. ex rel. Preston Cobb, Jr. v. R. P. Balkcom, Jr., Warden339 F.2d 95 (5th Cir. 1964)
  3. Ludden v. State137 S.E.2d 402 (Ga. Ct. App. 1964)

Most recent

  1. ex rel. Preston Cobb, Jr. v. R. P. Balkcom, Jr., Warden339 F.2d 95 (5th Cir. 1964)
  2. Allen v. State137 S.E.2d 711 (Ga. Ct. App. 1964)
  3. Ludden v. State137 S.E.2d 402 (Ga. Ct. App. 1964)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 2

DepthCaseCited by
Glass v. State, 134 S.E.2d 813 (Ga. 1964) 3
Avery v. Georgia, 345 U.S. 559 (1953) 423

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list