State v. Doolittle

Decided March 5, 1877

Supreme Court of New Hampshire · decided 1877-03-05

The respondent was indicted, jointly with one Bourne, for murder. He moved for a separate trial. The court denied the motion, and he excepted. Before the jury were impannelled, the respondents were informed that they were each entitled to twenty peremptory challenges. One Cutter was called as a juror, and accepted by Doolittle, but challenged by Bourne, and, against the objection of Doolittle, set aside by the court.

Cited by 3 later decisions — most recently June 1952

3 state decisions

Relies on People v. Vermilyea · People v. Howell · Hawkins v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1877-03-05

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Stanley, J.

¶1 The respondents were not, as matter of right, entitled to separate trials. Am. Cr. Law, ss. 433, 3195; Hawkins v. State, 9 Ala. 137; State v. Soper, 16 Me. 293; 9 Cow. 108, 138, 383; 6 Ham. 86; 2 Ashm. 32; 1 Baldw. 78; 2 Sumn. 20; 4 Johns. 296.

¶2 The right to challenge a juror is not a right to elect; it is a right to reject. Where two or more are jointly indicted for a capital offence, each one is entitled to the full number of challenges allowed by law. Am. cr. Law, s. 3195; U. S. v. Marchant, 12 Wheat. 481; People v. Vermilyea, 7 Cow. 383.

¶3 Exceptions overruled.

Foster and Allen, JJ., did not sit.