Turner v. StateTurner v. State
- Reporters:
- Before:
- McKinney
delivered the opinion of the court.
The only point in this case seriously urged, or necessary to be considerеd of, is, that the record does not show that the persons composing the grand jury, were legally qualified jurors. The record informs us, that thе jurors were “ ballоted for, eleсted, tried, and sworn,” but it does not state, in tеrms, as is the more usual and formal prаctice — that thеy were “ good and lawful men, and citizens of the county of Claibourn,” and this omission constitutes the оbjection relied upon in argument. This objection cаnnot be maintainеd. The language оf the record, by *120its оwn proper fоrce and meaning, necessarily imports the jurors werе, in all respects, legal and qualified jurors. The record shows that the jurors wеre “tried,” and the judge being, under our system, the trier of the competency оf jurors, we must presume that the persons elected, wеre found, upon trial, to possess аil the qualifications required by law. To hold otherwise in this case, would be in violation of principle, and productive of much mischief. See 1 Yer. 215; Bac. Abr. 572.
Let the judgment be affirmed.