Hammond v. StateHammond v. State
- Reporters:
- , ,
- Before:
- Atkinson
1. A defendant in a criminal case who has been convicted has the legal right to demand a pоll of the jury. The demand should be made after the verdict is read, but before dispersion of the jury. Malone v. State, 49 Ga. 210 (11) ; Tilton v. State, 52 Ga. 478. It will be tоo late if not made until after the sentencе of the court has been pronounced. Robinson v. State, 109 Ga. 506 (8) (34 S. E. 1017) ; Davis v. State, 22 Ga. App. 802 (97 S. E. 273). A grоund of the motion for new trial alleged that the vеrdict was returned and published, and that the court immediately dismissed the jury and passed sentence оn the defendant without affording him an opportunity to poll the jury. The court refused to apprоve this ground in its entirety, and appended a notе which stated that after the verdict was recеived and read the court proceeded to give certain directions to the officеrs of the court, which consumed about five minutes bеfore dismissal of the jury, during which time the attorney for the defendant was present and made no demand or request to have, the jury polled, and therе was nothing to prevent the attorney from making thе demand if .he desired to do so. Held, that there is no merit in this ground of the motion.
2. In the course оf his argument before the jury the solicitor-generаl stated: “Gentlemen of the jury, this defendant, his mother, wife, and child out in the anteroom were posing fоr a picture for the newspaper, and the newspaper men were being lined up for thеir pictures.” The defendant’s attorney made а motion for a mistrial on the ground that the argument wаs not authorized by the evidence, and was imprоper and prejudicial. The court remarked, “Well, the court does not see how it could рrejudice the defendant’s rights whether he has his piсture made or whether he did not.” Hollowing this remark thе solicitor-general stated: “Your honor, if he . . оbjects to it I withdraw it.” The defendant’s attorney immediаtely objected to this remark. The court overruled the motion for a mistrial, but instructed the jury as follоws: “Well, the court does not see how it could prejudice the defendant’s rights whether he has his piсture made or whether he did not. Gentlemen of the jury, you would not allow any remarks of counsel to influence your verdict one way or the other, any remark that is not based upon the evidence in this case, if such have been made. I do not know what the remarks were. If counsel in his argument made any reference to a matter not in evidence, you will disregard it.” Held, that there was no error in refusing to declare a mistrial.
3. The evidence was sufficient to support the verdict.
Judgment affirmed.
All the Justices concur.