Mississippi Code

Miss. Code Ann. § 13-5-79 (2026)

When opinion as to guilt or innocence will not render one incompetent in a criminal case

✓ current as of July 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section JustiaMiss. Code CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Any person, otherwise competent, who will make oath that he is impartial in the case, shall be competent as a juror in any criminal case, notwithstanding the fact that he has an impression or an opinion as to the guilt or innocence of the accused, if it appear to the satisfaction of the court that he has no bias or feeling or prejudice in the case, and no desire to reach any result in it, except that to which the evidence may conduct. Any juror shall be excluded, however, if the court be of opinion that he cannot try the case impartially, and the exclusion shall not be assignable for error.

Codes, 1880, § 3072; 1892, § 2355; 1906, § 2685; Hemingway's 1917, § 2177; 1930, § 2030; 1942, § 1763.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 36 cases, 1983–2019 · leading case: Neal v. State, 15 So. 3d 388 (Miss. 2009).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Neal v. State, 15 So. 3d 388 (Miss. 2009). · cites it 8× “" Miss. Code Ann. § 13-5-79 (Rev.2002). This Court will presume that the voir dire process *399 used at trial was "sufficient to ensure a fair and impartial jury.”

Caston v. State, 823 So. 2d 473 (Miss. 2002). · cites it 6× “") (citing cases); Miss.Code Ann. § 13-5-79 (1972). *500 On procedural grounds, once the judge exercised his discretion and determined that the jurors probably could not be impartial, then the determination may not be assigned on appeal as an error: Any person .”

Archer v. State, 986 So. 2d 951 (Miss. 2008). · cites it 4× “Miss.Code Ann. § 13-5-79 (Rev.2002). The trial judge whose duty is to see that a competent, fair, and impartial jury is empaneled, is empowered with *959 broad discretion to determine whether a prospective juror can be fair and impartial notwithstanding the juror's admission…”

Jordan v. State, 995 So. 2d 94 (Miss. 2008). · cites it 4× “Miss.Code Ann. § 13-5-79 (Rev. 2002). In this case, voir dire was conducted in which the venire was asked whether or not they could be fair and impartial, and whether or not they could give Jordan the presumption of innocence.”

Tapper v. State, 47 So. 3d 95 (Miss. 2010). · cites it 4× “Tapper, however, asserts that "the disparate treatment by the trial court of defense counsel's motions as compared to the State's motion cannot be reconciled." Tapper's argument with respect to juror number 23 is simply without merit.”

Johnson v. State, 631 So. 2d 185 (Miss. 1994). · cites it 4× “Miss. Code Ann. § 13-5-79 (1972) provides as follows: Any person, otherwise competent, who will make oath that he is impartial in the case, shall be competent as a juror in any *191 criminal case, notwithstanding the fact that he has an impression or an opinion as to the guilt…”

Hansen v. State, 592 So. 2d 114 (Miss. 1991). · cites it 2× “See Miss. Code Ann. § 13-5-79 (1972); Burt v.”

Joseph Patton v. State of Mississippi, 248 So. 3d 763 (Miss. 2018). · cites it 4× “2008) (citing Miss. Code Ann. § 13-5-79 (Rev. 2002)). “The trial judge whose duty is to see that a competent, fair, and impartial jury is empaneled, is empowered with broad discretion to determine whether a prospective juror can be fair and impartial–notwithstanding the juror’s…”

Coverson v. State, 617 So. 2d 642 (Miss. 1993). · cites it 4× “") (citing cases); Miss. Code Ann. § 13-5-79 (1972). On procedural grounds, once the judge exercised his discretion and determined that the jurors probably could not be impartial, then the determination may not be assigned on appeal as an error: Any person .”

Puckett v. State, 737 So. 2d 322 (Miss. 1999). · cites it 2× “However, the State maintains that this issue is procedurally barred under Miss. Code Ann. § 13-5-79 (1972). This statute states: Any person, otherwise competent, who will make oath that he is impartial in the case, shall be competent as a juror in any criminal case,…”

Edwards v. State, 723 So. 2d 1221 (Miss. Ct. App. 1998). · cites it 9× “" "Miss.Code Ann. 13-5-79 (1972) (emphasis added).”

Langston v. State, 791 So. 2d 273 (Miss. Ct. App. 2001). · cites it 2× “1986); Miss.Code Ann. § 13-5-79 (1972). The judge is the person empowered with the very broad discretion to decide whether a juror can be impartial.”

Show all 36 citing cases →

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.