TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

State v. Henderson

State v. Henderson.

State v. Henderson, 53 S.E. 170 (S.C. 1906)
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
Supreme Court of South Carolina · State Highest Courts
Decided
January 26, 1906
Judges
Gary
Citations
53 S.E. 17073 S.C. 2011906 S.C. LEXIS 162
Disposition
Reversed.
Syllabus
1. Ruled by preceding case of State v. Perry. 2. Appeal. — Where State appeals from order quashing panel of petit jurors because of relationship of jury commissioner, the appeal presents merely an abstract question.
Summary
Before Prince, J., Saluda, April, 1905. Indictment against Wm. L. Henderson, Alfred Free and Wm. Culbreath. From order quashing panel of-petit, jurors, State appeals. The Solicitor and Mr. Thurmond cite: 34 S. C., 34; 31 S. C., 257; 5 S, C., 429; Code of 1902, 2944. Mr. Ramage (oral argument).

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Gary

The opinion of the Court was delivered by Mr. Justice Gary.

This is an appeal from an order sntaining the challenge to the array of petit jurors, on d-e *202 ground that the auditor, who is ex officio■ one of the jury commissioners, and who took part in drawing said jury, was related by consanguinity within the fifth degree to the person for the killing of whom the defendants were indicted.

1

In sustaining the motion, his Honor, the presiding Judge, said: “I am. constrained to the opinion that the laws and the decisions of our Supreme Court leave me no^ discretion where the jury commissioners, or any of them, is related to either the deceased or defendant within the sixth degree.”

The ruling was erroneous, as will be seen by the reference to the case of State v. Perry, in which the opinion has just been filed.

2

As the defendants, however, cannot now be tried by jurors drawn from said array, the appeal presents merely an abstract question, and the appeal is dismissed.

How later courts describe this case

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

1906: 11912: 11929: 119062026peak 1906 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Spencer v. Mahon55 S.E. 321 (S.C. 1906)
  2. State v. Malloy74 S.E. 988 (S.C. 1912)
  3. State v. Hester146 S.E. 116 (S.C. 1929)

Most recent

  1. State v. Hester146 S.E. 116 (S.C. 1929)
  2. State v. Malloy74 S.E. 988 (S.C. 1912)
  3. Spencer v. Mahon55 S.E. 321 (S.C. 1906)

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 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

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