Opinion ID: 1140588
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: did the trial court err by refusing to quash the venire?

Text: During the voir dire by the State, the following exchange took place between the assistant district attorney and a potential juror in the presence of the entire venire panel: Q... . Is there anyone here who having heard my additional questions and thought about what you heard from the Judge, who could now say, Well, yes, I have heard something about this case? A. (response by juror) Q. All right, sir. This would be  A. (James Hitt) James Hitt. It was in the  just a brief sketch in the paper came out, and I read that, a habitual offender. (R. 99-100). The prosecutor then asked whether Hitt could disregard what he had read in the newspaper and decide the case based on the evidence presented in court. Hitt replied, Yes, sir. The trial court made the following inquiry: Let me ask all members of the jury this question, requested by the parties: Mr. Hitt just made a statement of what he read in the paper. And like all of you know, newspapers, a lot of people think if its printed in the newspaper, it's got to be right, and of course, I've found from my experience about ninety percent of it is just somebody's opinion of what happened, and you go back and see who's writing those opinions and everybody's as qualified to write an opinion as I am to write about getting to the moon in a rocket. But anyway, people read papers with that assumption. Mr. Hitt stated that he read in the paper that Mr. Benson was charged, and you all have heard his statement. Is there anybody on the jury that would be influenced by what Mr. Hitt had read in the paper? Would this have any bearing or influence on any member of the jury from the statement Mr. Hitt just stated? A. (No juror response). Q. Mr. Benson is here to be tried, despite what the paper says, he's here to be tried on a robbery charge, as I have stated to you. And where the paper gets their information, I don't know. Is there anybody who because this was published in the paper would have any prejudice arise out of it or have it influence you in any way in your determining his guilt or innocence on the charge robbery we're here to try today? Is there anybody that this would have any influence or bearing on? If so, please raise your hand. A. (No juror response). The Court Let the record show that every member of the jury assures the court that this would have no influence or bearing on their decision. The defense then moved for a mistrial and a new jury panel, and the trial court overruled the motion. In Robinson v. State, 253 So.2d 398 (Miss. 1971), this Court held: The voir dire on the part of the court clearly discloses that no juror felt or believed that the statement made ... . would prejudice him or prevent him from being a fair and impartial juror. Matters of this nature are left considerably in the discretion of the court and we hold that the court did not abuse its discretion but acted properly in the matter. Smith v. State, 198 So.2d 220 (Miss. 1967). Robinson, at 400; See also West v. State, 463 So.2d 1048, 1054 (Miss. 1985); Campbell v. State, 309 So.2d 172, 176 (Miss. 1975). After questioning the jurors in this case, the trial court determined that each could disregard Hitt's remark and decide the case on the evidence. The trial court followed a course of action identical to the one employed in Robinson; therefore, the court was within its discretion in overruling the motion for mistrial. This assignment of error, therefore, is without merit.