This section is from the book "Popular Law Library Vol10 Criminal Law, Criminal Procedure, Wills, Administration", by Albert H. Putney. Also available from Amazon: Popular Law-Dictionary.
There are statutory provisions for the drawing, summoning and filling of the panel of jurors, and any radical or material departure from the statutory mode tending to affect and prejudice the rights of the accused is good ground for a challenge to the entire array, and it would be error for the court to overrule the challenge.7
Thus where the sheriff and the jury commissioners, after selecting names for jurors, placed them in the jury wheel which was sealed with only one seal by sealing wax, instead of the respective seals of the sheriff and each commissioner, the irregularity was held sufficient ground for challenge to the array.8
But mere irregularities without positive injury to the rights of the accused are not sufficient to sustain such challenge.9
Thus where the regular panel of jurors having become exhausted, the court by ordering the clerk to draw one hundred additional ones from the jury box instead of directing the sheriff to summon a sufficient number to fill the panel as prescribed by-statute, departed from the statutory mode, but no injury appearing to have been done the accused, the irregularity was held not sufficient to warrant a reversal.10
5 Wartner vs. State, 102 Ind., 51.
6 Brewster vs. People, 183 Ill., 143;
George vs. People, 167 Ill., 417; Murphy vs. State, 97 Ind., 570; Ward vs. People, 30 Mich., 116; State vs. Maine, 27 Conn., 281; Edwards vs. State, 45 N. J. L., 419. 7 State vs. Skinner, 34 Kan., 254; Borrilli vs. People, 164 Ill., 559.
8 Brown vs. Com., 73 Pa. St., 321;
Hughes' Cr. Law, Sec. 2922. 9 Wistrand vs. People. 213 Ill., 72-77; Healey vs. People, 177 Ill., 306; Ferris vs. People, 35 N. Y., 125; Harmon vs. Ter., 9 Okl., 313; People vs. Ah Chung, 54 Cal., 398; Henry vs. People, 198 Ill., 162, 186 (harmless irregularities in filling the panel).
Mere informalities or defects in the process are not grounds for challenge to the array, no injury appearing.11
A panel of jurors may be regarded as exhausted within the meaning of the statute by the failure of jurors to appear when summoned, as well as otherwise.12
 
Continue to: