Court Opinion

ID: 9769208
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-29 14:39:26.599257+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:18:01.591113
License: Public Domain

*198WOODLEY, Presiding Judge,
dissenting.
Jury misconduct is one of the grounds upon which reversal of this conviction is sought. The court’s refusal to order a mistrial when Officer Stroud gave the unresponsive answer that he was familiar with mug shots of appellant and two others involved in the robbery is another.
The majority opinion does not reverse upon either but couples the two claims of error.
It is my view that the trial court did not err in overruling appellant’s motion for mistrial, and did not err in overruling his motion for new trial based upon claimed misconduct of the jury. If this be so, the two claimed errors do not together show reversible error.