Printable Format43-159. Same; exclusions from jury service by court. In addition to the persons excused from jury service in K.S.A. 43-158, and amendments thereto, the following persons may be excused from jury service by the court: (a) Persons so physically or mentally infirm as to be unequal to the task of ordinary jury duty;
(b) persons whose presence elsewhere is required for the public welfare, health or safety;
(c) persons for whom jury service would cause extraordinary or compelling personal hardship; and
(d) persons whose personal relationship to the parties or whose information or interest in the case to be tried is such that there is a probability such persons would find it difficult to be impartial.
History: L. 1971, ch. 176, § 5; L. 2000, ch. 42, § 2; July 1.
Revisor's Note:
Exemptions provided herein applicable in criminal prosecutions; exemption not a basis for challenge, see 22-3408.
Scope of questions in juror examination, see Kansas Benchbook (1978), Kansas Judicial Council, pp. 88, 89.
Cross References to Related Sections:
Motion to discharge jury panel in criminal prosecutions, see 22-3407.
Persons excused from jury service, see 43-158.
Law Review and Bar Journal References:
"Voir Dire on Insurance Advertising," Laurence Rose, 3 J.K.T.L.A. No. 2, 12, 14 (1978).
"Attorney Conducted Voir Dire: Safeguard of the Constitutional Right to an Impartial Trial by Jury," William (Trey) A. Alfred III, J.K.T.L.A. Vol. XXIII, No. 4, 15 (2000).
CASE ANNOTATIONS
1. Refusal to remove sheriff from jury panel for cause not reversible error. State v. Mahkuk, 220 K. 74, 75, 551 P.2d 869.
2. Qualification of juror is question for determination by trial court; section distinguished from 43-158. State v. Folkerts, 229 K. 608, 612, 617, 629 P.2d 173 (1981).
3. Error not to declare mistrial after admission by juror of hearing impairment near end of first day. State v. Miller, 11 K.A.2d 410, 411, 413, 722 P.2d 1131 (1986).
4. Statutes relative to jury panels not violative of constitutional right to jury representing fair cross-section of community. State v. Baker, 249 K. 431, 436, 819 P.2d 1173 (1991).
5. Challenge to jury composition and failure to discharge jury panel examined. State v. Ji, 251 K. 3, 8, 832 P.2d 1176 (1992).
6. Ex parte communication between judge and venireman held to be harmless error. State v. Edwards, 252 K. 860, 864, 852 P.2d 98 (1993).
7. Error for court not to grant motion for mistrial where one of jurors stated he had heard none of defendant's testimony. State v. Hayes, 270 K. 535, 17 P.3d 317 (2001).