State v. Rector

Decided September 19, 1930

Supreme Court of South Carolina · decided 1930-09-19

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“As to the second ground, I may add the consideration that one who may be drawn, sworn in, and acts as a grand juror in passing upon an indictment, when he is not legally qualified to do so, is a stranger to the proceedings, as much as if he had never been drawn; his participation would therefore be illegal; it would be impossible to gauge the extent of his influence upon the qualified members of the jury.”

quoted by 1 later decision, including State v. Bibbs

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1930-09-19

How this case has been cited

Cited by 19 later decisions — most recently April 2005

1 federal appellate · 2 district · 15 state decisions

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Mr. Justice Cothran

¶1 (concurring) : I concur in the opinion of Mr. Justice Blease in this case. In addition to the) very clear disposition of the first ground upon which the motion to quash the indictment was made, it may be observed that a common use of the word “then” authorized by Webster is in the sense of “immediately”; if the deceased was shot in Greenville County, and did immediately die, he necessarily died in Greenville County.

¶2 As to the second ground, I may add the consideration that one who may be drawn, sworn in, and acts as a grand juror in passing upon an indictment, when he is not legally qualified to do so, is a stranger to the proceedings, as much as if he had never been drawn; his participation would therefore be illegal; it would be impossible to gauge the extent of his influence upon the qualified members of the jury.