[Download] "Tommy Earl Landrum v. State Texas" by Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas No. 1030-88 # Book PDF Kindle ePub Free
eBook details
- Title: Tommy Earl Landrum v. State Texas
- Author : Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas No. 1030-88
- Release Date : January 09, 1990
- Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
- Pages : * pages
- Size : 61 KB
Description
Opinion ON APPELLANT'S PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW Appellant was convicted by a jury of the offense of burglary of a
habitation. The punishment was assessed at seventy years in the Texas Department of Corrections1 and a fine of $10,000.00.
The Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction. Landrum v. State, 757 S.W.2d 860 (Tex.App. - Waco 1988). This Court granted
review to determine whether it was error for the trial judge, over appellant's objection, to excuse one of the jurors for
the reason that he was mentally impaired and allow the trial to continue with eleven jurors. We also granted review to determine
whether it was reversible error for the State to introduce evidence that members of appellant's family harassed the victim's
daughter prior to trial. Because of our holding on the first ground, we need not decide the second. We will reverse the judgments
of the Court of Appeals and the trial court. The jury was selected, sworn, and instructed to return the next day. That evening one of the jurors telephoned the judge
and explained that he had misgivings regarding his willingness to consider the higher end of the range of punishment. The
juror indicated that he felt as though he could not sit in judgment of another, and therefore he could not be fair and impartial.
The next morning the trial judge informed the parties of this communication and called to the stand the juror to explain his
earlier statements. The trial court found that the juror was mentally impaired from serving in this case because of his statements
regarding the range of punishment. The judge then found him disabled under Article 36.29(a), V.A.C.C.P., and, over appellant's
objection, excused him and continued the trial with the remaining eleven jurors.