Jones v. Commonwealth

2 Citing cases

  1. Watson v. Commonwealth

    433 S.W.2d 884 (Ky. Ct. App. 1968)   Cited 17 times
    In Watson v. Commonwealth, Ky., 433 S.W.2d 884, 887 (1968), the Court was again presented with facts similar to the instant case and stated that "if prejudice exists, it may be brought out on voir dire, and of course the defendant still has peremptory challenges,' thus... the question is to be resolved on the basis of actual bias...."

    Annotation, "Juror's presence at or participation in trial of criminal case (or related hearing) as ground of disqualification in subsequent criminal case involving same defendant," 6 A.L.R.2d 519, 546. See also Jones v. Commonwealth, 310 Ky. 180, 220 S.W.2d 369, 370 (1949). In Brumfield v. Commonwealth, Ky., 374 S.W.2d 499 (1964), the trial court overruled a defendant's challenge of certain jurors for cause on the ground that some of them had served on a jury that had convicted him the day before on a speeding charge, and that others had heard the trial.

  2. Gibson v. Commonwealth

    302 S.W.2d 128 (Ky. Ct. App. 1957)   Cited 1 times

    However, his affidavit failed to meet the requirements of ยง 189 of the Criminal Code of Practice in that it did not state he had caused a subpoena to be issued for each of the absent witnesses, nor did it state he had made any effort to obtain their attendance at the trial and that the witnesses were absent without his consent or procurement. Hunt v. Com., 273 Ky. 806, 117 S.W.2d 1010; Jones v. Com., 310 Ky. 180, 220 S.W.2d 369; Dehart v. Com., Ky., 287 S.W.2d 618. It has long been the rule in this jurisdiction that for an accused to obtain a continuance on account of absent witnesses he must show in his affidavit for continuance reasonable diligence on his part to procure their attendance and that their absence was unavoidable.