'"Ex parte Jones, 753 So.2d 1211, 1213 (Ala.Crim.App. 1999) (quotingBeck v. State, 365 So.2d 985 (Ala.Crim.App.), aff'd, 365 So.2d 1006 (Ala. 1978), rev'd on other grounds, 447 U.S. 625 (1980)). As early as 1898, this Court held:

Here, Chavers has shown no prejudice to his case caused by juror no. 216's service on the jury. Cf. Ex parte Jones, 753 So.2d 1211 (Ala. 1999) (where member of grand jury was resident of Florida, the indictment was not void because objection was not timely raised and there was no prejudice shown). In fact, he did not raise this matter in the motion for a new trial; the trial court brought up sua sponte the possibility of the residency problem.