Opinion ID: 2449917
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Hall's Motions to Remove for Cause

Text: Hall asserts that he was unconstitutionally forced to use four [4] of his nine peremptory strikes on veniremembers that should have been removed for cause. Section 494.480.4 [5] is controlling: The qualifications of a juror on the panel from which peremptory challenges by the defense are made shall not constitute a ground for the granting of a motion for new trial or the reversal of a conviction or sentence unless such juror served upon the jury at the defendant's trial and participated in the verdict rendered against the defendant. Hall does not contend that any of the persons that served on the jury were unqualified, only that the veniremembers against which he used his strikes were unqualified. Peremptory strikes are granted by statute, not the constitution. State v. Gray, 887 S.W.2d 369, 383 (Mo. banc 1994). Hall was afforded all of the protection the statute provides. He does not present grounds for relief. State v. Richardson, 923 S.W.2d 301, 310 (Mo. banc 1996).