State v. Livingston

Decision Date15 June 1932
Docket NumberNo. 548.,548.
Citation202 N.C. 809,164 S.E. 337
CourtNorth Carolina Supreme Court
PartiesSTATE . v. LIVINGSTON.

Appeal from Superior Court, Wilkes County; Harwood, Special Judge.

Clyde Livingston was convicted of breaking and entering storehouse, other than burglariously, with intent to steal goods and chattels, and he appeals.

New trial.

Criminal prosecution tried upon indictment charging the defendant, and another, with breaking and entering the storehouse of one M. J. Parsons, other than burglariously, with intent to steal the goods and chattels of the

said owner to the value of $25, etc., contrary to the provisions of C. S. § 4235.

The defendants were arrested, and, after having had their shoes measured to ascertain whether they corresponded with the tracks at the store (State v. McLeod, 198 N. C. 649, 152 S. E. 895), the township constable and Mr. Parsons told them that their shoes fitted the tracks, "it looks like you had about as well tell it, " and "the chances were if they would tell they got it (the stolen property) it would be lighter on them." The boys talked together a little and then said: "We got some stuff." (Objection; overruled; exception.)

From an adverse verdict and judgment of 18 months on the roads, the defendant, Clyde Livingston, appeals, assigning errors.

D. 6. Brummitt, Atty. Gen., and A. A. F. Seawell, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.

Trivette & Holshouser, of Boone, and Cranor & McElwee, of Wilkesboro, for defendant.

STACY, C. J.

The confession of the defendants made under the inducement that the chances were "it would be lighter on them" if they would say they got the property, coupled with the remark of the officer, "It looks like you had about as well tell it, " must be regarded as arising out of circumstances which render it involuntary, and, therefore, incompetent as evidence against appellant. State v. Myers, 202 N. C. 351, 162 S. B. 764; State v. White-ner, 191 N. C. 659, 132 S. E. 603; State v. Jones, 145 N. C. 466, 59 S. E. 353; State v. Horner, 139 N. C. 603, 52 S. E. 136, 4 Ann. Cas. 841.

Almost the identical question here presented, certainly the same in principle, was decided in State v. Davis, 125 N. C. 612, 34 S. E. 198; State v. Drake, 82 N. C. 593; State v. Dildy, 72 N. C. 325; State v. Whitfield, 70 N. C. 356; State v. Matthews, 66 N. C. 106; State v. Lowhorne, 66 N. C. 638.

A free and voluntary confession is deserving of the highest credit, because it is presumed to flow from the strongest sense of guilt, but a confession wrung from the mind by the flattery of hope, or by the torture of fear, comes in such questionable shape as to merit...

To continue reading

Request your trial
44 cases
  • State v. Sanders
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of North Carolina
    • 12 Junio 1970
    ...See also State v. Rogers, 233 N.C. 390, 64 S.E.2d 572, 28 A.L.R.2d 1104; State v. Gosnell, 208 N.C. 401, 181 S.E. 323; State v. Livingston, 202 N.C. 809, 164 S.E. 337. The admission is rendered incompetent by circumstances indicating coercion or involuntary action. State v. Guffey, 261 N.C.......
  • State v. Anderson, 721.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of North Carolina
    • 20 Noviembre 1935
    ......P. Stewart, we are disposed to disregard form for merit and to hold that the alleged confession should have been stricken out. State v. Livingston, 202 N. C. 809, 164 S.E. 337; State v. Grier, 203 N.C. 586, 166 S.E. 595; State v. Davis, 125 N.C. 612, 34 S.E. 198; State v. Drake, 113 N.C. 624, 18 S.E. 166; State v. Dildy, 72 N.C. 325; State v. Whitfield, 70 N.C. 356.          A free and voluntary confession is deserving of ......
  • State v. Thompson, 41
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of North Carolina
    • 6 Junio 1975
    ...See also State v. Rogers, 233 N.C. 390, 64 S.E.2d 572, 28 A.L.R.2d 1104; State v. Gosnell, 208 N.C. 401, 181 S.E. 323; State v. Livingston, 202 N.C. 809, 164 S.E. 337. The admission is rendered incompetent by circumstances indicating Coercion or involuntary action. State v. Guffey, 261 N.C.......
  • State v. Moore
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of North Carolina
    • 25 Noviembre 1936
    ...sheriff of the county on August 8, had been excluded for involuntariness, State v. Anderson, 208 N.C. 771, 182 S.E. 643, State v. Livingston, 202 N.C. 809, 164 S.E. 337, it is the contention of the defendant that his subsequent confession made to Dr. Griffin on August 12 or 13 should likewi......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT