# Appendix — Shinall v. Mississippi > Briefs, arguments, decisions, and more. URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/brief%3Amicro_IA40385603_0964%3A2 ## Record - **Collection:** Supreme Court brief - **Document type:** Appendix - **Published:** January 1, 1967 - **Citation:** 389 U.S. 1014 ## Text APPENDIX A _ Opinion of the Supreme Court of Mississippi ss IN THE 3 SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI No. 44,352 , : - “Vv - CLoupms Suman, — against State oF Mississrppt, . — ae Ropeers, Justice: “ _ This is the second time this-case has been appealed to this: Court. On the former appeal (Shinall v. State, 187 ‘So. 2d 840, 1966), we. reversed and remanded the case because of an apparent racial discrimination in the selec- tion of the grand and petit juries. When the mandate of this Court reached the Cireuit-Court of Forrest County, Mississippi, the appellant was reindicted by another grand jury. He was again tried and convicted of murder, and sentenced to suffer death. Appellant has again appealed to this Court and contends that the trial court committed prejudicial error and that a new trial should be granted to him. ; . The defendant, Cloudies Shinall, appellarit here, shot ~ and killed Frederick L. Humphrey, a Constable of Justice of the Peace District No. 3 of Forrest County, Mississippi. The constable was not in his district at the time of the — | Appendia A shooting. The defendant is a Negro, and the constable was Caucasian. . The record reveals that on the day of the homicide, the defendant borrowed an automobile from a. friend, L. C. Leggett, for the purpose of going to get his pay check. He took two friends with him;~and when they returned to the defendant’s neighborhood, Palmer’s Crossing, they visited several taverns where they consumed a large.quan- - tity of beer. During the afternoon, someone in the auto- mobile with the defendant discovered a twenty-two caliber ’ pistol, holster and belt under the front seat of the ‘auto- mobile. The defendant took the pistol and buckled it upon his person. He exhibited the pistol in one of the beer taverns, ané@ when officers came by the tavern, he _ _ gave the pistol, holster and belt to the proprietress. When the officers left, she réturned them to the defendant. The defendant and his companions continued to move from one beer tavern to another, until a short time after dark. They got into Leggett’s automobile again in front of the ‘*Heat Wave’’, and started to drive away, but the motor ceased to function at a place where there was a ditch in the road. Thus, the defendant was in the process of navigating the rough place in the road. The constable pointed the light beam of his flashlight toward the auto- mobile; whereupon, the deferfdant drove away at such a rapid rate of speed his companions became alarmed. They beseeched defendant to slow his speed or stop because they were afraid he would wreck the car and cause their deaths. ; In the meantime, Constable Humphrey had gotten into an automobile belonging to another constable and had begun to follow the automobile driven by the defendant. The defendant drove at a rapid rate of speed across a blacktop road and made several turns until’he came into a curve in the’road in front’of the Welborn home. The - defendant was going at such a fast rate of speed he ‘es peated, adenine a aerares | 8a | Appendix A ss “ could not traverse the curve and the automobile went out of control into the driveway of the Welborn home, — where it struck a wire fence. The constable came up behind the automobile, stopped his car, got out, left the lights burning, and approached ‘the automobile driven by _ defendant. . Two witnesses said the officer had a flashlight in his hand. One witness said he also had a pistol in his hand. The constable directed the passengers to get out of the automobile, and when they alighted, the officer looked into the front seat where defendant was. At this time a gun fired. One witness saw the flash of the gun, and another witness testified that the defendant shot the officer. The two passengers ran away, and when they — had gone some distance, they heard two more pistol shots. _, Later that night, the defendant told: one of his com- panions that after they fled, he walked up to Humphrey and shot the ‘‘son-of-a-bitch in the head.’’ -He later told L. C. Leggett, owner of the automobile, that he had killed - “‘the son-of-a-bitch’’, naming: Humphrey, with Leggett’s | pistol. The pistol was:later récovered from Leggett. -It -was°mailed to the Federal Bureau of Investigation; to- gether with a bullet found in the hody of deceased by the coroner, and upon examination by them it was discovered that the bullet from the body of’the deceased matched ‘the other bullets fired from the pistol of L. C. Leggett, so that -an expert witness was able to testify that the bullet found in the body of the constable was fired from the pistol . belonging to L. (. Leggett. : I After the second indictment was presented by the’ grand jury, the defendant moved to quash the indictment upon the ground that there was a systématic discrimina- tory selection of the members of the grand jury.. The attorneys for the State and defendant entered a stipula- da , Appendix A tion and offered testimony on this subject. It appears that since the former trial of this case, the Clerk of Forrest County has performed his @uty as ordered by the Federal Court in that he has registered all colored persons who desired to vote. ,The record reveals that the Board of Supervisors has selected names for jury service without regard to race since the former trial of this case. The testimony reveals that since November 1965 nine Negroes have served on three grand juries. in Forrest County; that Negroes have served pon petit juries in criminal cases; that a special venire of seventy-nine names summoned on the trial in the instant case contained fourteen Negroes. The trial judge overruled the motion to quash the indict- . ment, and later overruled a motion to quash the petit jury. He took judicial notice that Negroes were not discrimi- nated against in the selection of jurors. | _ On appeal to this Court, appellant complains that: (1) - women were not required to serve on juries in Mississippi ; : (2) Negroes were systematically excluded from jury selec- tion because, (a) they were being selected as they had been for many years, (b) that the Members of the Board of Supervisors did not select persons of. “good - intelligenee, sound judgment, and fair character’’ as required “by Mis- ~ sissippi Code Annotated section 1766 (1956) since they. . ' had selected persons they did not know; and (c) the State ‘of Mississippi peremptorily challenged qualified colored persons left on the jury after the voir dire. We are-of the opinion that these contentions are not well-taken for the following reasons: (1) Women are not required to perform jury duty in Mississippi nor does the Federal Constitution require women to serve on juries in . state courts. Mississippi Code Ann. 41762 (1956) ; State v. Hall, 187 So. 2d 861 (Miss. 1966) ; Pendergraft v. State, 191 So. 2d 830 (Miss. 1966). (2) The evidence in this . case shows that the Supervisors of Forrest County are 5a Appendia A | nots. electing juries from the list of qualified voters of that county without regard to race or ethnic groups, ard that the constitutional impediment of discriminatory jury selection for which this case was previously reversed has been removed. All qualified persons desiring to. vote are now béing registered by the Circuit Clerk of Forrest County, and from ‘this list juries are now being drawn. (a) The argument that the juries are still being selected ’ as they have been for many years is not -well-taken, because the list from which the juries are now selected is a new ~ list of qualified voters, including Negro citizens who have 5 registered to vote. (b) We-are of the opinion “that Mis- sissippi Code Annotated section 1766 (1956) in which the Board of Supervisors is directed to select ‘‘qualified. persons of good intelligence, sound judgment, and fair character’’ is‘not a jurisdictional requirement, and although it is the duty of the Members of the Boards of Supervisors. _ to-select. good citizens for jury service (Black v. State, 187 So. 2d 815, Miss. 1966), nevertheless, the jury laws of this ' State are directory and the selection of the jury list in an informal or irregular manner does not render it il- "Tegal. Miss. Code Ann. 41798 (1952). The contention of ' appellant that the State of Mississippi, in the instant case, discriminated against Negroes by peremptorily challenging five Negroes, is not supported by the facts or by the law. : ‘The voir dire examination shows that most of the persons challenged by the State had been associated with the de- fendant. Moreover, the State is not required to accept jurors simply because they belong to the same ethnic group _ as the defendant. Swain v. Alabama, 380 U. S. 202, 85 Sup. Ct., 324 (1965) ; Brown v. Allen, 344 U.S. 443, 222 F. or 10 (4th Cir. 1952). ba Appendia A ; OH The appellant contéHds that the attempted arrest of. the appellant by Constable Humphrey was illegal because he was not a duly elected constable in District 3 and that when he began pursuit of defendant, no crime had been committed by him for which arrest should have been made. © It is argued that deceased had a bad reputation for being _a turbulent-and violent person who arrested persons with- out probable cause, and for that reason the appellant had a right to resist an unlawful arrest and defend himself to the extent of taking the life of the deceased Constable Humphrey. wa | oy There is a list of cases heretofore decided by this Court in which we have held that a person may resist an unlaw- ful arrest by such force as may be necessary, short of taking human. life. Note 1. Weare of the. opinion that this line of authority is not applicable i in the instant case because, under the facts here presented, the constable was. attempting to make a legal arrest. Peace Officers and citizens may at any time arrest persons who are commit- “ ting crimes in their presence, or to prevent a breach of | the peace. Miss. Code Ann. § 2469 (1956). Moreover, the statutory law of this State expressly enjoins all con- ‘stables ‘‘to keep and preserve the peace within his county”’. Miss. Code Ann. § 3887 (1956). fees The defendant contends on appeal that at the time the constable began following him, he had committed no crime for which he could be lawfully arrested. Appellant — cites the case of Smith v. State, 240 Miss. 738, 128.So0. 2d 857 (1961) to support ‘contention. We are of the opinion that the Smith ease is not authority here because -the officer in that case had begun the pursuit of the de- - fendant before the defendant had violated the traffic laws of the State. Whereas, in the instant case thé constable _ did not begin pursuit of the defendant until after the . 7 7a ne Append: A _ defendant had ‘thins away at such a fast rate of speed '- his companions ‘became alarmed for their safety. It is pointed out by Blashfield in his Cyclopedia of Automobile Law and Practice, Volume 8 (Perm. Ed.) section 5372, page 117, (1950), that reckless driving was a breach-of—— ar A the peace under the common law. Moreover, reckless driving is a misdemeanor under the statutory law of - Mississippi.’ Miss, Code Ann.°§ 8175 (1956). See Barnes v..State, 249 Miss. 482, ,162 So. 2d 865 (1964). We are of. the opinion that the attempted arrest of the defendant, under the facts shown here, was not an illegal attempt to arrest him. On the second trial, the defendant did nit testify, but - sought to introduce certain witnesses to prove that the deceased constable had a bad reputation in the com- “munity for violence; ‘that he had arrested some persons without probable cause. and had pistol-whipped two of. _ the proffered witnesses. .The defendant’ also sought: to show that Wilmer Kitchens, the regular: Constable of Justice of the Peace District No.*3, worked with the. _- = deceased Humphrey and that as a team these two constables . had a bad reputation for harassing colored citizens in and around beer taverns at Palmer’s Crossing. The defendant offered to show that the ‘deceased had drunk from. a half- _ pint bottle of gin a short time before he was killed. The de- fendant also contends that. he was not permitted to show that someone had threatened his life, ond that bullets had. ‘ been sent to defendant. It will be observed that this etheniiin falls into seven distinct categories: (1) general reputation of deceased for violence ; (2) reputation for unlawful arrests; (3) bad repu- tation of. Constable Kitchens ; (4) particulat ineidents of vio- lence to others ; (5) unlawfal assault upon women by third ’ © , Sa © . | Appendix A persons; (6) unidaimedl threats ; and (7) ‘deceased had ‘drunk gin a short time before his death. A minute examination of the proffered testimony has —“‘tonvineed us that tle trial judge was correct in excluding this: evidence; and for that reason we discuss each cate- gory of evidence separately (1 and 2).- The testimony ‘of: certain. witnesses as to the character of the deceased . . constable was properly excluded because ‘this evidence ~*. was not admissible under. the facts in this case. Ordinarily the character or reputation of the deceased person is not involved as part of the issue in a ‘murder case, and proof relative thereto is generally inadmissible.. It. has often .. been pointed out | that the violent, revengeful or plood- * - thirsty character of deceased cannot be shown as‘an excusé . for’ ra Homicide because the uiprovoked killing of a bad ~*~ “man is no less murder than the dalling of the. most peaceful ‘and law-abiding person in the¢ommunity. Spivey v. State, +B Miss. 858 (1881) ; Chase v. State, 46 Miss. 683 (1872) ; . Jolly v. ‘Bate, 13°S. & M. 223 (Miss. 1849); Dowling v._ State, 5 8.:&\M. 664 (Miss. 1848); 40 C. J.S. ‘Homicide | 222° y (1944), : _ There are exceptions to this general. sites: The violent: dangerous and, turbulent character of a’deceased may be ..> shown; (A) When, from the circumstances of ‘the case, it is: a part of the res gestae; (King v. State, 65 Miss. 576, 562,. 5 So. 97—1888) ; (B) ‘where the evidence of the homicide is wholly. ‘Circumstantial (Chase v. State, supra) ; (C) where _ itis doubtful as to who the aggressor was at the time of the __ homicide. (Jolly v. State, supra; Cotton y. State; 31 Miss.” “604 (1856) ; 30r {(D) where the immediate circumstances of : ‘the killing render“it. doubtful as to whether or not the‘act . ‘was justifiable. Wesley v. State, 37 Miss. il 346 (1808) ; Chase v. State, supra. Before testimony of bad ene’ of a deseiiaed is : ents: acta! one ».of the “gpm to the ssa rule, 9a Appendix A the pitians must show that the issue of eelf-deteans must at least be in doubt: Spivey v. State, supra; Moriarty v. State, 62 “Miss. 654, 661 (1885); Smith v. State, 75 Miss. 542, 23 Sos 260 (1898); Andersén v. State, 181 Miss. 300, 179 So. 560 (1938); Wesley v. State, supra. It is said in’ Wigmore on Evidence Volume 2 (3d Ed.) section a 206, pages © 44, 49-52- (1940) that: ‘‘ Another and more. specific form of limitation is the doctrine of ‘overt act’, peculiarly developed in Louisiana and Florida.~ The notion here is that the deceased’s ‘reputation can have a ‘bona fide’ bear- ° ' ing on the defendant’s apprehension only where there occurs, at the time of thé affray, some con- duct of the deceased which might be otherwise color- less, but when interpreted by his known character - becomes apparently an act. of aggression. Thus - - there must be some ‘overt act’, i.e. of possible ag- gression ‘before the ‘reputation-evidence can be re-. . | ceived. This is a wise and fair limitation, provided - _ it be not further refined by details which generate into quibbles,—a proviso not always observed. “Two peculiar questions may arise under the overt-act form of the doctrine (yy Shall the ques- tion whether an overt act is sufficiently evidenced to lay the foundation. for the reputation-evidence be left entirely i in the hands of the trial Court? Unless our law is to become a mass of quibbles which no ‘practitioner cam master and every murderer will welcome, the answer must be in the affirmative. (2) May the defendant’s mere unsworn assertion of an “2 — overt act (where permitted instead of his sworn testimony) be considered as in itself some evidence of an overt act? It certainly should be; but whether itis sufficient evidence for the trial court shonld never be considered on appeal.”’ 10a Appendix ‘A The only. evidence in the record indicative of an overt get toward the defendant by the constable was the testi- mony of Lewis Willie Smith. He testified that the con- - stable came toward the automobile driven by the defend-’ ant, after it had gone out of control and into a ditch, with a flashlight and a gun in his hand. As against this testimony, Smith testified that the constable did not threaten the defendant, and James Anderson, the other passenger in defendant’s automobile, testified thht he did not see a gun in the hand of the constable, and that the constable did not threaten either of the parties at the time of the _ attempted arrest... The malice of the defendant was clearly shown by the statements he made after the homicide, that he had walked up to the constable after he fell and shot _ the son-of-a-bitch’’ again in the head. Moreover, the defendant knew that the person asking him to disembark - was an officer and that it was his duty to submit to the ‘arrest. Pickett v. State, 139 Miss. 529, 104 So. 358 (1925) ; “Malis v. State, 27 S. E. 2d 91 (Ga. 1943). Defendant had — no right to kill the officer merely because he was afraid _ of him, or was afraid he would arrest him ‘‘for noth- ing.”’ eee Bate Cea, . (3) The testimony that Constable Kitchens had a bad reputation for violence was not admissible as evidence in the murder case where Constable Humphrey was killed, , since Kitchens was not present at the time of the homicide. 40 C. J. S. Homicide § 223 at 1143, § 274 at 1229 (1944). (4 and 5). Testimony of antecedent specific déts of vio- - lence alleged to have been committed by deceased was not admissible|to show bad character. Newsome v. State, 197 Miss. 797, \20 So. 2d 708 (1945). Details of a previous difficulty batween the deceased and a third person prior to the homicide is inadmissible to show bad character of the - deceased. 40 C. J..S. Homicide § 210 at 1119 (1944) ; Rich * State, 124 Miss. 272, 86 So. 770 (1921); McCoy v. State, lla Appendia A. 91 Miss. 257, 44 So. 814, 815 (1907 ); The Chamberlayne Trial Evidence § 621. at 591 (1936); Thompson v. State, 84 Miss. 758, 36 So. 389 (1904) ; Carter v. State, 167 Miss; 331, 145 So. 739 (1933). (6) The pocilered testimony rejected by the trial judge — and complained of here is the testimony of L. C. Leggett. He was asked: ‘‘Now there had been a time, had there not, when one of the men whom you know was at Lucy, Wilborn’s place had vent some bullets by you to Cloudies Shinall, is that right? ..:. A. He gave me some bullets that was in the back of his car. 28a | Appendix B | } | actually happened. Would yon go ahead, saaldetes “A. Mr. : Cotton came up on the side I was sitting on and ovened ’ the door. He told me to get out. I got out and stood up side the car. He said you been drinking # I said yes, sir. He said you’re drunk. I said no, sir. He said go . get i in the car. I said—_ Q. Now, . Madam, I only suggest to you. one thing, to speak B sages and distinctly so that everyone can hear you. You are mumbling downward and it ’s jost. _A. Well that ’s the way I talk. I can’t-help that. 2 -° Q. Talk to me, please. A. And he said go” get in. . the car..I asked him why. He said don’t ask me no ques- and I asked him not to push me, just: ‘to tell me what he was arresting me for. _* * * : ‘ (1247) Q. And what did he say to you? A. He said to get in the car and don’t ask him no questions. | Q. And did you.do that? A. No,I didn’t. . Q. What did you do? A. I told him I’d get in there when he told me what he was arresting me for, and he kept —. ~——pushing me, and I pushed him back and we got to fighting. - ‘Q. And what happened? A. Well, Mr. Kitchens came out and he saw we was fighting out Gere | in the road and he told a boy— . tions, ‘just get in the car. And I said I will if you tell - me what you’re arfesting me for. Then he/ pushed me. Q. What was Mr. Humphrey fighting with? What did ~ he have in his hand? A. He had a blackjack in his hand. Q. What did you have in your hands? A. Nothing. . Q. And what do you weigh? A. At that time I weighed _ about a hundred and twenty-eight. Q. And Mr. Humphrey, as I understand, was about six feet tall and a substantial man. A. Yes, sir. Q. So he had a blackjack and you, at a hundred and twenty-eight, had nothing. Right? A. That’s right. Pe - a Pall : 2 24a Appendia-B Q. Go ahead. A. And Mr. Kitchens come out of the Black Cat and he saw we was fighting, so he. told O..D. to go out there and see if he couldn’t stop us. So he come | out there and told: me to stop trying to fight against him firs," and get in the car, and he put me in the car. — Q. He putyou in the car? A. Yes, sir. Q. What then happened?, (1248) A. We went eal to a place called Roger Lee’s Place and he stopped the car and Mr, Kitchens got out and went in and Mr. mnerne? ! stayed in the ‘ear. Q. Mr. Kitchens got out and Mr. Humphrey stayed in nt A. That’s right. _ Q. All right, go inl A. And Mr. Kitchens brought some more mens out there and me and Mr. Humphrey was still having ‘words, and so he said— b | Q. Who said? A. Mr. Humphrey. When Mr: Kitchens _ ee ‘got back in he said I know what we ought to do with her, y _ we ought to carry her down here in these woods. Q. Yes? - A. I said yeah, I heard about that, you all carrying people to the. woods, and I said if you carry -~ down there some of us ain’t coming out. _ Q. You chad heard about people saying about they car- —-~¥ied people to.the woods?» A. Yeah, they— a -Q. What had you heard? A. I had heard that they. arrested colored mens and carried them to the jail and carried the women to the woods when they wanted to. By Hon. James Finch: Your Honor, we object to this going into this record— rf By Hon. Raymond A. Brown: Well, this j is what commenti te reputation is, your Honor. This is what reputation is, what one hears in the community. , By the. Court: Well, go ahead. Make your - record. ice ‘ tang ad _. 25a Appendia s * (1249) Q. ‘AN right now, : with respect to what you had | heard, who have you heard this from, about them carrying the.men to. jail and the women into the woods? A. I had heard it from different friends around there I’d be talking to. When something would happen. like that we all tolng in the community we would talk about it. Q. You were in communication? A. Yes, Sir. ° Q. Now how often did these things happen that you — heard about? Was it weekly, monthly, yearly, once in a while or what? A. It happened about two or three times a month. Q. And who would be involved\in these: things? “A. It would be Mr. Kitchens, Mr. Cotton, and a colored woman. Q. Mr. Kitchens, Mr. Cotton and a colored woman? 7 A. Uh-huh. Q. The colored - woman being taken into the ‘woods, ~ right? A. Yes, sir. Q. All right: Now then, because you had heard these things when you got in the car what was your state of ‘mind? A. That I didn’t want to go to the woods with them. Q. And then what happened? ‘A. Well that’s why I was resisting. Q. Yeah. Well what hoo after you got in the cart. A. Well after Mr. Kitchens brought two or three. | more colored mens out there and put them in the car and me and Mr. Humphrey’ was still having words, when we got up to there, I don’t know the sireet, it was where the Sears Roebuck Warehouse is or Sears Roebuck Store,—I just saw the Sears .sign,—and he told Mr. Kitchens to stop the car, said if she don’t shyt her mouth I’m going to shut it for her, and he came back there and tied the ‘door—. (1250) Q. Now this lady is having to write this down, * sO you must slow up and talk more distinctly. Go ahead now. A. And he came back there and opened the door | 26a kPa Appendiz B and pulled me out and started hitting me again with the blackjack and we started fighting and I bit him. He told ~~” Mr. Kitchens to come get this black so, and so. off of __ him, and Mr. Kitchens got out and he ‘hit me wight here. _(Indicating) _Q. Well, speak up so thatthe ater can dion: Mr.. Kitchens got out and what? A. He hit me right here Pe side the nose-with a pistol, and I wasn’t but half un-" conscious. I was never unconscious,— -Q. All right, go ahead. A. But it weakened me and : ‘then they put me back: in’the' car and tried to shut the door on me, and this other fellow that was) in there he grabbed me and pulled me out of the way, and when we got to the jail they let the colored mens out and when I _ started to get out they told me to sit there; and after - the colored mens: got out then both of them got. me and '" earried me in the jail,.and Mr. Print Jones he was the jailer then and he— | _.Q: Mr. Print Jones was the jailer? A. Yes, sir. ‘ Q. What did hé do? ‘A. He-asked Mr. Cotton what happened to him,gand he told him that I had did that to him. Hevsaid the black so and so, you ought to have. killed her. And then they vaaciares menting me again there - in the jail. _Q. Whot Not just they. ‘Whot A. Cotton . and ™ Kitchens. Q. All right. Now then what henesiad after that? A. Well. I hollered and two ‘colored trustees came down ‘and got me. (1251) Q. Yes? Go ahead: A. And before - they got me as I started in the door Mr: Cotton pushed me and I i fell on the concrete steps. -.Q. Mr. Cotton Humphrey? A. Yeah. . -Q. Go ahead, what happened then? A. The “ trusties took me upstairs and locked me up, and Mr. Cotton come ~ i Antiet has) et AL. SN Appendiz B ° up there and stood on athe door steps and told. me if I | _ didn’t shut my miouth what he would do to me.’ |. Q. Now was this the last experience you had with Mr. Humphrey or with Mr. Kitchens? «A. 20a, Of. Q. You had no other experience with them? A. No. Q. Now for the record, do you know the reputation of Mr Humphrey i in the community for peace and violence? Yes or no?. A. Yes. Sica ~ Q. You.do? ez _ 82a “Appendia B By | ai Raymond A. Brown: These would be specifics that would support his knowledge of the reputation. By Hon. James Finch: Your Honor, you can never go into specifics in the determination of this. By the Court: I sustain. By Hon. Raymond A. Brown: That is my offer of proof, Your Honor. By Hon. James Finch: To’ which we object. By Hon. Raymond A. Brown: And I press ‘it, of course, on (1282) the same grounds that it. shows state of mind and reputation of the deceased. By Hon. James Finch: We object. By the Court: I sustain. Bring the jury back. (Witness excused.) en Se er ae -' 83a Cie APPENDIX Cc Pertinent Secthens of Miss. Code pn 1962 Regarding Juror Selection § 1762. Who are competent jurors. Every male citizen not under the age of twenty-one (21) years, who is either a qualified elector, or a resident: freeholder of the county for more than one year, and has not been convicted of an infamous crime, or the unlawful sale of intoxicating liquors within a period of five (5) years and who is not a common gambler or habitual drunk- ard, is a competent juror; but no person who is or has been within twelve (12) months the overseer of a public road or road contractor shall be competent ‘to serve as a grand juror. But the lack of any such qualifications on the part of one or more jurors shall not vitiate an indict- ment or verdict. However, be it further provided that . no talesman or tales juror. shall be qualified who has served as such tales juror or talesman in the last preceding two (2) years; and no juror shall serve on any jury: who has — served as such for the last preceding two (2) years; and . no juror .shall serve who has a-case of his own pending i in. ‘that court, provided there are sufficient qualified jurors in the district, and for trial at that term. : § 1762-01. Resident frecholders not qualified electors— competent jurors by court order. . Whenever, any judge of the circuit court of any circuit. court district determines in his discretion that persons’ who are then, and have been for more than one (1) year previ- - ously thereto, a resident freeholder of any county in his dis- trict though not a qualified elector of that county, should be ' ‘made and constituted a person qualified to serve as a compe- tent juror of the county of that person’s residence, but who is otherwise qualified, the said circuit judge is authorized to - make and enter an order in term time or in vacation, upon 34a Appendix. C “i F ee, : the minutes of the circuit court of such county to that effect and thereupon all persons in that county whd.are and have . been such a resident freeholder shall thereupon be qualified, in accord with the terms of this act, to serve upon any jury _* jn that county. Said order shall remain in full force and fo effect until terminated by an order of the judge ‘of the : circuit court district in which said county is situated, to. be entered upon the minutes of the circuit court in that tl in term time or vacation. § 1762-02. Who are competent jarors—atvee am of eomnt order. . Upon the entry of the itisiiba order by said circuit “Fudge of the circuit court, and until its termination by an order made under Section 1 [§ 1762-01] hereof, supra, every - ‘male citizen not under the age of twenty-one (21) years, who is either a- qualified elector, or who is and has been a resident freeholder of the county for more than one (1) year, and has not ‘been convicted - of an n infamous-erime, : or the unlawful sale of intoxicating liquors within a period of five (5) years and who is-not a common gambler or habitual drunkard, is a competent juror; but’ no person who is or has been within twelve (12) months the overseer. of a public road or ‘road contractor shall be competent to serve as a grand j juror. But the lack of any such qualifica- _ tions on the part of one or more jurors shall not vitiate an . indictment or verdict. However, be it’ further provided that no talesman or tales juror shall be qualified who has . served as such tales juror or talesman in the last preceding, two (2) years; and no juror shall serve on any jury who has served as such for the last preceding two (2) years; - and no juror shall serve who has a case of his own pend- ing in that court, provided that there are sufficient qualified jurors in the district, and for trial at that term. Ld VARIN A CERN RE I OB A PRPC PESTLE CLE LE SLEAHD nts ll at ag Sew. 35a : Appendia C § 1762-03..-How lists of jurors procured. - As long as an order provided for by Section 1[§ 1761-01] supra, is in force and effect, the board of supervisors at the April meeting in each year, or at a subsequent meeting if not done at the April meeting, shall select and make a list of persons to serve as jurors in the circuit court for the twelve (12) months beginning more than thirty (30) days afterwards, and as:a guide in making the list they shall use the registration book of voters and the land assessment roll of the county, and shall select and list the names of qualified persons of good intelligence, sound judgment, and fair char- acter, and shall take them as nearly as they conveniently can, from the several supervisors districts in proportion to the number of qualified persons in each, excluding all who have served on the regular panel within two (2) years, if _ there be not a deficiency of jurors. The clerk-of the circuit -court shall put thé-names from each supervisors. district in “a separate box ‘or compartment, kept for that purpose, _ which shall be locked and closed and sealed, except when juries are drawn, when the names shall be drawn from each box in regular order until a sufficient number is drawn. The board of supervisors shall cause the jury box to be emptied. of all names therein, and the same to be refilled from the '- jury list as made by them at said meeting. If the jury box shall at any time be so exhausted of names as that a jury cannot be-drawn as provided by law, then the board of super- visors may at regular meeting make a new list of jurors in ‘the manner herein provided. — In order that the board of supervisors may properly perform the duties required of it by this section, it is hereby made the duty of the circuit clerk of the county and the reg- istrar of the voters-to certify to the board of Supervisors during the month of March of each year under the seal of «> his office the number of qualified electors in each of the sev- eral supervisors districts in the county. _ 36a Appendix C ‘If and when the above order of the district judge is ter- - minated, then thereafter the land. assessment roll of the _ county shall not be used or referred to in making a list’ of © ‘persons to serve.as aa ig in the said circuit court. --§ 1762-04. When act’ becomes operative—conditions. The “authority conferred by the terms of Sections 1,2 . and 3 [§§ 1762-01, 1762-02, 1762-03], supra,-shall | ‘be exer- - eised.only on and after any date when persons who are and have been resident freeholders of a county for more than . one (1) year are eliminated by amendment or otherwise - as qualjfied or competent jurors under the provisions of Section 1, Chapter 308, Mississippi Laws of 1962, being Section 1762, Mississippi Code of 1942, Recompiled; and Section 2 of said Chapter 308, Mississippi Laws of 1962, being Section 1766, Mississippi Code of 1942, Recompiled. Ss * * "$1766. How lists of jurors procured. The board of supervisors at the April meeting in each . year, or at a subsequent meeting if not done at the April meeting, shall select and make a list of persons to serve as jurors in the circuit court for the twelve (12) months beginning more than thirty, (30) days afterwards, and as a guide in making the list they shall use the registration book of voters and shall select and list the names of quali- fied persons of good intelligence, sound. judgment, and fair character, and shall take them, as nearly as they conve- niently can, from the several supervisors districts in pro- portion to the number of qualified persons in each, exclud- ing all who have served on the regular panel within two (2) ' years, if there be not a deficiency of jurors. : The clerk of _ the circuit court shall put the names from each supervisors district in a separate’ box or compartment, kept for the pur- pose, which shall be locked and kept closed and sealed, ex- cept when juries are-drawn, when the names shall ve drawn - > ee ad _. 8Ta A ppendia C from each —_ in regular order until a sufficient number i is drawn. The board of supervisors shall cause the jury box to be emptied of all names therein, and the same to be re- filled from the jury list as made by them at said meeting. If the jury box shall, at any time, be so exhausted of names as that a jury cannot be drawn as provided by law, then the board. of supervisors may at any regular meeting make a new list of*jurors in the manner herein provided. In order that the board of supervisors may properly per-° | form the duties required of it by this section, it is hereby made the duty. of the circuit clerk of the county and the reg- istrar of the voters to certify to the board of supervisors during the month of Mareh of fer year under the seal of his office the number of qualified electors in-each of the sev- eral vin hii districts 1 in the county. § 1768. List certified to circuit court. A certified copy of the lists shall be- immediately de- ¢ -livered by the clerk of the board of supervisors to the clerk of the circuit court, and shall be by him carefully filed and | preserved as.a record’ of his office; and any alteration thereof shall be treated and punished as provided in case of the alteration of a record. i? § 1769. Names of jurors not serving. returned to box. The'slips containing the names of jurors drawn for any regular or special term shall be safely kept by the clerk until the sitting of the court at such term, and the names of such persons as shall fail to appear, or shall be excused by the court, or not required to serve in consequence of the ’ failure of the term, or other cause, shall be returned to the é box. hI ‘ rs ¢ on ‘ . »* s a4 4 ¢ . . be oe t v eal ss . oe . * . ° . . ‘ “i “s . . ae . » ‘ a x Pd f . . e . re? ee " a Ce ee eee ~ : { , ; : ' ; —§ » a \ : 7 ® . ° ' ee \ A . . .. . . ! . e ‘ he ° ae ~~ f © . . . ° ” : . \ ® : ‘ . ° . ‘ A . . . a ie : A \ 5 ‘ tae 4 : . F er te jae “ , . ¥ J 5 “I . . ® : . . . . = ‘“ 7, . . a . ° . . . ‘ ae . ba x - . . x i . 4 ~ . . . ' Fy J] 7 i a : ‘ . : ; 8 : . . - . Mf sp . « . ° ; » . . . . e ° . is 3 ’ earns . - : . . ; . ° 4 ‘ ‘ . i ‘ whe . : ° . t é ie . =e fir ; : a: » , 7 Sei . e . . 4 rl .’ / . ’ - ‘ oa ‘ bg . % an -* . ° : . . 7 . as . . : ae ° * ies . % ° - F ° * . . ‘ Tae 4 3 : Ne —— Sey P ° A : rie . a ‘a ed $ ’ ‘ . eh 2 y . - . . . \ a . . ” ss ‘ . . . e . . toad * re é A a +£ => oe ‘ : A = ° —" Ps . . . . . . ® . . . © . ee » he ’ . e of . 4 oie ks e. ; >. > : . a & . : . . ‘ . ° . . ; _e : . ¢ ‘ ps * e >) . . ‘ * 6 , -_ e® e id . . - € 3 ‘ . -. si ’ . . S , _ * °° . : . e a ‘ ” . .° : : rey . . ‘ t a ; . . ° ° . e — * ° ° oo F . : . A ‘ . . ’ ; . + : or ° ’ d a ** Pt . 3 . ~ . v * oe ~ bd —_— " ». - - . ~ % : * . 65 we . ‘ bg s . . e . eo ony ORR OVERS HBLRPD DMI EL IPS ar --- Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/brief%3Amicro_IA40385603_0964%3A2. Public record. Not legal advice.