Opinion ID: 1604196
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: the trial court erred in excusing jurors following discussions between the court and prospective jurors outside the presence of the defendant.

Text: The court qualified the prospective jurors pursuant to Miss. Code Ann. § 13-5-1 (1972), giving the various reasons which would disqualify a person from serving as a juror. Several prospective jurors asked to approach the bench. After off-the-record discussions between the court and these prospective jurors, two panel members, Robert Pleasant and Margaret Knight, were excused. Presumably, the court found that they were barred by statute from jury service. Chase argues that this action violated his right to be present during the impaneling of the jury. As has been the case in other assignments of error, there was no objection raised at the time of the alleged error. Chase also failed to object to the jurors prior to the jury being impaneled and indicated to the court that he had no objection to the selection of the jury. Since no objection was made, the issue is not properly preserved for review by this Court. As noted by the State, another independent basis for rejecting Chase's argument is the failure to preserve an adequate record. In Hansen v. State, 592 So.2d 114, 127 (Miss. 1991), this Court stated: It is elementary that a party seeking reversal of the judgment of a trial court must present this court with a record adequate to show that an error of reversible proportions has been committed and that the point has been procedurally preserved. This assignment of error is procedurally barred and without merit.