MUSGROVE V. COM.
CRIMINAL: Juror disqualification; voir dire
PUBLISHED: REVERSING AND REMANDING; GUIDUGLI
DATE RENDERED: 11/17/2006
CA reversed and remanded Defendant’s conviction due to TC’s failure to strike juror for cause. The sole issue before the Court was whether Defendant’s constitutional right to a fair and impartial jury was impaired when he was forced to use a peremptory challenge to remove a juror who was otherwise disqualified from jury service in this case. When read together, KRS 29A.130 and KRS 29A.080(2)(g) form a bar disqualifying any juror from serving on both the grand jury and the petit jury within a twenty-four-month period. Furthermore, KRS 29A.080(3) states that the limitations on jury service contained in that statute may not be waived. When a juror who is disqualified pursuant to KRS 29A.080 is permitted to remain in the jury pool following a timely and properly made objection, the defendant’s due process rights have been violated and he is entitled to a new trial.