
    No. 11,551.
    The State vs. Charles LeDuff.
    Whatever the answer of the juror on his voir dire to the questions of counsel for the accused, if it appear on the whole examination, and especially to the questions of the judge, that the juror has no fixed opinion — i. e., that can not be changed by testimony, and his mind is in a condition to do justice, according to the evidence and the charge of the court, he is a competent juror. 35 An. 302, 31V; 38 An. 41, 480.
    If the accused obtains an acceptable jury without exhausting his peremptory challenges, this court will not direct a new trial, because the bill assigned error in tb^ overruling of the challenges for cause made by the accused. Ibid.
    
    APPEAL from the Fourteenth Judicial District Court, Parish of Pointe Ooupee. Talbot, J.
    
    
      M. J. Cunningham, Attorney General, and Alex. Hebert, District ■Attorney, for the State.
    
      Yoist & Claiborne Attorneys for Defendant and Appellant.
   The opinion of the court, affirming judgment of the District Oourt, was delivered by Miller, J.  