Page:Portis v. State.pdf/5

364Rh Third. Was there such misconduct on the part of the jury trying the case, as to warrant the court to set aside the verdict?

During the trial, one of the jurors sitting in the case, and while a recess was had, said to one Bluther, that if he (Bluther) would give him (the juror) fifty cents, he would hang the jury so that the defendant would get clear of "keno." Where misconduct on the part of jurors has been of injury to a party, it is the duty of a court to set aside the verdict. It was misconduct on the part of the juror to offer to hang the jury for the defendant for money. But it appears he did not do what he offered to do, but decided according to the law and the evidence, and no injury resulted from the act. If he had done what he offered to do, the State and not the defendant, would have been the injured party, and the defendant cannot complain of an act that would have been for his benefit. This juror should have been heavily fined, but his act created no cause for a new trial.

No error appearing in the record, the judgment of the Criminal Court of Jefferson county is in all things affirmed.