State v. Menzies
In State v. Menzies, 889 P.2d 393 (Utah 1994), the Court held that a per se reversible error does not occur whenever a party is compelled to use a peremptory challenge to remove a jury member that the trial court erroneously failed to remove for cause. Id. at 400.
That case held that to prevail on a claim of error based on the trial court's failure to remove a prospective juror for cause, a defendant must demonstrate prejudice, viz., show that a member of the actual jury that sat was partial or incompetent. Id. at 398.
The Court stated that given the great importance stare decisis has for the American system of common law, we will not overrule prior cases unless we are "clearly convinced that the rule was originally erroneous or is no longer sound because of changing conditions and that more good than harm will come by departing from precedent." Id.