Case ID: ohio-law-abs_5/html/0189-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "KINKADE, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

No. 238
    No. 20084
    James D. Lyon v. State of Ohio.
    Error to the Court of Appeals of Huron County.
    683. JURY — 1. In a criminal case trial court may order that peremptory challenges be deferred until those for cause have been exhausted and jury is in the box.
    2. When number of peremptories is greater on one side, judge may require side having it, to challenge two more at a time before the other side is required to further challenge.
    3. Not error for court to require that an omission to challenge peremptorily or its waiver, shall have same effect as the exercise of the right.
    480. EVIDENCE — In trial of a criminal case, evidence of other criminal conduct of accused admissible to show his motive in his action with respect to the crime, but court should definitely instruct jury as to limit of the purpose of the testimony.
    225. CHARGE TO JURY — When in a first degree murder trial evidence shows intentional shooting by the accused of a police officer, endeavoring to lawfully arrest him, and that the shooting was done in an unlawful resistance in order to escape and the death of the officer, a charge on assault and battery not called for.
   KINKADE, J.

1. In the absence of statutory regulations governing the subject, it is not error for the trial court to order that the exercise of all peremptory challenges of jurors shall he deferred until after all challenges for cause have been exhausted, and a full jury is in the box with respect to each of whom challenges for cause have been completed; nor is it error for the trial judge to order which side' shall first challenge peremptorily; and where the number of peremptory challenges is greater on one side than on. the other, the trial judge may order the side having the greater number of challenges to challenge two or more at a time before the other side is required to make any challenge, to the end that the peremptory challenges on both sides may ne completed as nearly as practicable at the same time; nor is it error for the court to require that an omission to challenge peremptorily or a waiver of such challenge shall have the same effect as the exercise of the right.

2. In the trial of a criminal case, evidence of other criminal conduct of the accused may be admitted in evidence for the purpose of showing the motive of the accused attending his action with respect to the crime for which he is being tried. The trial court by instructions to the jury should definitely limit the purpose for which such evidence is received.

3. When the charge in the indictment is one of first degree murder and the evidence shows the intentional shooting, by the accused, ©f a police officer who was at the time endeavoring to make a lawful arrest of the accused, and that the shooting was done by the accused in an unlawful resistance of such arrest and to effect his escape from the officer, and the death of the officer was caused by the shooting, the case is not one calling for a charge to the jury on the subject of assault and battery, and the refusing of a request for such charge is not error.

Judgment affirmed.

Marshall, CJ., Day and Allen, JJ., concur.