Santry v. State
In Santry v. State, 67 Wis. 65, 30 N.W. 226 (1886), the trial court permitted a prosecutor who had not exercised all his peremptory challenges to exercise an additional one after he had expressed his satisfaction with the jury. See 67 Wis. at 66-67.
The defendant had not yet accepted the jury. See id. at 67. The supreme court noted that the jury had been neither accepted by both parties nor sworn. See id.
The court stated that in the absence of any statute or rule, whether to permit the prosecutor to strike an additional juror was left to the discretion of the trial court. See id.