# Eizember v. State

> Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · August 10, 2007 · 164 P.3d 208

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9788462

## Case

- **Full name:** Scott James EIZEMBER, Appellant v. STATE of Oklahoma, Appellee
- **Court:** Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma
- **Decided:** August 10, 2007
- **Citations:** 164 P.3d 208; 2007 OK CR 29; 2007 WL 2142304
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Lewis
- **Judges:** Lumpkin, Johnson, Lewis, Chapel
- **Cited by:** 11 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9788462

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- stating pre-trial questionnaire cannot trump the actual voir dire
- noting that the statutory language is readily understandable

## Opinion text

LEWIS, Judge,
concurs in results:
T1 I concur in the result in this case affirming the convictions, judgment and sentences, however, I write to address the issue of the jury questionnaire. Based on the responses of the challenged jurors in this case, I agree with the legal analysis as presented by the majority opinion; however, I reserve judgment in other cases instead of agreeing with the statement that the pretrial questionnaire cannot trump the actual voir dire. I am of the opinion that there are some cases in which the jury questionnaire answers could indeed trump voir dire. I am not convinced that the jurors responses in this case standing alone provided cause for their disqualification. I therefore concur in the result reached in this case.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9788462. Public record. Not legal advice.