22-3407.
Motion to discharge jury panel.
(1) Any objection to the manner in which a jury panel has been selected or drawn shall be raised by a motion to discharge the jury panel. The motion shall be made at least five days prior to the date set for trial if the names and addresses of the panel members and the grounds for objection thereto are known to the parties or can be learned by an inspection of the records of the clerk of the district court at that time; in other cases the motion must be made prior to the time when the jury is sworn to try the case. For good cause shown, the court may entertain the motion at any time thereafter.
(2) The motion shall be in writing and shall state facts which, if true, show that the jury panel was improperly selected or drawn.
(3) If the motion states facts which, if true, show that the jury panel has been improperly selected or drawn, it shall be the duty of the court to conduct a hearing. The burden of proof shall be on the movant.
(4) If the court finds that the jury panel was improperly selected or drawn, the court shall order the jury panel discharged and the selection or drawing of a new panel in the manner provided by law.
History:
L. 1970, ch. 129, § 22-3407; July 1.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
12
cases (
2 in the last 5 years), 1979–2021 · leading case:
State v. Cheun-Phon Ji, 832 P.2d 1176 (Kan. 1992).
State v. Cheun-Phon Ji, 832 P.2d 1176 (Kan. 1992).
· cites it 4× “The trial court found that Ji had had sufficient time to comply with K.S.A. 22-3407 but had not shown good cause why the motions could not have been filed earlier, and it denied the motions.”
State v. Robinson, 363 P.3d 875 (Kan. 2015).
· cites it 2× “2d 1176 (1992) (reviewing decision on untimely motion to discharge panel under K.S.A. 22-3407 for abuse of discretion); see United States v.”
State v. Baker, 819 P.2d 1173 (Kan. 1991).
· cites it 2× “Other facts will be stated as necessary for the discussion of particular issues.”
State v. Timley, 875 P.2d 242 (Kan. 1994).
“Further, K.S.A. 22-3407 requires that any objection to the manner of selecting a jury panel must be made by a written motion to discharge the panel at least five days prior to the trial date if the names and addresses of the panel members are known, or prior to the time the jury…”
State v. Holt, 612 P.2d 570 (Kan. 1980).
· cites it 3× “Fulcher had filed a timely motion challenging the array, K.S.A. 22-3407. On the morning of trial Fulcher was successful in obtaining a severance.”
State v. Haislip, 701 P.2d 909 (Kan. 1985).
“K.S.A. 22-3407(1) provides that, “Any objection to the manner in which a jury panel has been selected or drawn shall be raised by a motion to discharge the jury panel.”
State v. McCambry, 594 P.2d 222 (Kan. 1979).
“” K.S.A. 22-3407. This was not done and the matter might well end there.”
State v. Coy, 672 P.2d 599 (Kan. 1983).
· cites it 2× “Although defense counsel did move to discharge the jury panel, he did not comply with the provisions of K.S.A. 22-3407 which provides: “22-3407. Motion to discharge jury panel.”
State v. Lewis, 161 P.3d 807 (Kan. Ct. App. 2007).
“Although re *93 search revealed no Kansas cases citing the applicable standard for reviewing a district court’s denial of a motion to discharge a jury, K.S.A. 22-3407 imposes an affirmative duty upon the party seeking discharge of the jury to prove the jury selection was…”
State v. Jackson, 494 P.3d 225 (Kan. Ct. App. 2021).
“22-3410(3) (challenges for cause); K.S.A. 22-3407(1) (challenges to jury panel selection).”
State v. Villa-Juarez (Kan. Ct. App. 2021).
· cites it 2× “" K.S.A. 22-3407(2). If the movant satisfies this step, then "it shall be the duty of the court to conduct a hearing.”
State v. Kleypas (Kan. 2016).
“These principles apply to the penalty phase of a capital case. As we stated in Robinson: "While K.”
— K.S.A. § 22-3407(1) — 3 cases
State v. Haislip, 701 P.2d 909 (Kan. 1985).
“K.S.A. 22-3407(1) provides that, “Any objection to the manner in which a jury panel has been selected or drawn shall be raised by a motion to discharge the jury panel.”
State v. Cheun-Phon Ji, 832 P.2d 1176 (Kan. 1992).
“The trial court found that Ji had had sufficient time to comply with K.S.A. 22-3407 but had not shown good cause why the motions could not have been filed earlier, and it denied the motions.”
State v. Jackson, 494 P.3d 225 (Kan. Ct. App. 2021).
“22-3410(3) (challenges for cause); K.S.A. 22-3407(1) (challenges to jury panel selection).”
— K.S.A. § 22-3407(2) — 1 case
State v. Villa-Juarez (Kan. Ct. App. 2021).
“" K.S.A. 22-3407(2). If the movant satisfies this step, then "it shall be the duty of the court to conduct a hearing.”
— K.S.A. § 22-3407(3) — 1 case
State v. Villa-Juarez (Kan. Ct. App. 2021).
“" K.S.A. 22-3407(2). If the movant satisfies this step, then "it shall be the duty of the court to conduct a hearing.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.