Court Opinion

ID: 9458772
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-04 21:01:06.659027+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:35:53.296167
License: Public Domain

ROSS, Circuit Judge
(dissenting).
There is no dispute about what happened in the trial of this case. One of the prospective jurors, while being questioned in the presence of all of the other prospective jurors, said, “He shot my son,” referring to Willie Houston. At this point it would have been a simple matter to discharge the prospective jurors and start over since very little of *1230the court’s time had then been expended. The trial court chose instead to instruct the jury to disregard the remark.
In my opinion, the remark was a direct accusation of defendant Willie Houston of committing a serious crime with which he was not charged, and the caution and instructions of the court could not possibly erase the prejudicial effect of the remark from the minds of the jury. See State v. Strong, 119 Ohio App. 31, 26 Ohio Op.2d 134, 196 N.E.2d 801 (Ct.App. Clark County, 1963). Since we do not have before us a transcript of the evidence adduced at the trial, it is not possible to say that the evidence of guilt is so overwhelming that the error should be deemed harmless. I would reverse as to the defendant Willie Houston and order a new trial.