Case Title: Grooms v. State

Citation: 426 S.W.2d 176

Docket Number: 

State: tennessee

Court: Tennessee Supreme Court

Date: 1968-03-18T00:00:00Z

Document:
426 S.W.2d 176 (1968) Furman Junior GROOMS and Wilbur Stinnett, Plaintiffs in Error, v. STATE of Tennessee, Defendant in Error. Supreme Court of Tennessee. March 18, 1968. Edward F. Hurd, and Ben W. Hooper, II, Newport, for plaintiffs in error. George F. McCanless, Atty. Gen., and Robert F. Hedgepath, Asst. Atty. Gen., Nashville, Henry F. Swann, Dist. Atty. Gen., Dandridge, prosecuted the case in the trial court, for defendant in error. PER CURIAM. Plaintiffs in error, Furman Junior Grooms and Wilbur Stinnett, appeal from a conviction of burglary and larceny. In this case the Court is confronted with the minutes of the trial court which affirmatively show plaintiffs in error were convicted by a jury of thirteen members. Since this will require reversal of the judgment of conviction, we do not deem it necessary to go into the facts of this case. The right of trial by jury is governed by Article 1, Section 6 of our Constitution, which is as follows: This constitutional provision has been held to mean a trial by "twelve good and lawful men." Neely v. State, 63 Tenn. 174 (1874). A conviction by an eleven-man *177 jury is invalid. Bowles v. State, 37 Tenn. 360 (1858); Bell v. State, 37 Tenn. 507 (1857). In Willard v. State, 174 Tenn. 642, 130 S.W.2d 99 (1939), this Court, in regard to this constitutional provision said: A criminal conviction is just as invalid if tried by a jury of more than twelve members as it is when tried by a jury of less than twelve members. The judgment is reversed and the case remanded for a new trial.