Case ID: okla-crim_8/html/0341-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "FURMAN, P. J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

W. D. EDWARDS v. STATE.
    No. A-1420.
    Opinion Filed November 18, 1912.
    (127 Pac. 872.)
    JUEY — Challenge to Panel — Grounds. Under section 6795, Comp. Laws 1909, a challenge to the panel must be founded on facts from which the defendant suffered material prejudice.
    (Syllabus by the Court.)
    
      Appeal from Oklahoma County Court; John W. Hayson, Judge.
    
    W. D. Edwards was convicted of violating the prohibitory law, and his punishment assessed at a fine of $500 and six months’ confinement in the county jail, and he appeals.
    Affirmed.
    
      
      Pruiett & Sniggs, for appellant.
    
      Smith C. Matson and C. I. Davenport, Asst. Attys. Gen., for the State.
   FURMAN, P. J.

The challenge to the panel in this case is simply a statement of conclusions of law, and does not state any fact from which it is made to appear that appellant suffered material prejudice. This question has already been passed upon in the case "of Wood v. State, 3 Okla. Cr. 568, 107 Pac. 944. This court there said:

“It will be seen from section 6795 of this act that the challenge to the panel must be founded on facts from which the defendant has suffered material prejudice.”

We find no material errors in the ruling of the trial court. The jury were the exclusive judges of the credibility of the witnesses. The testimony of the state amply sustains the verdict. No testimony was offered by appellant.

The judgment of the lower court is therefore affirmed.

ARMSTRONG and DOYLE, ]]., concur.