Belcher v. Commonwealth

Decision Date16 March 1933
Citation160 Va. 891
CourtVirginia Supreme Court
PartiesWILLIAM BELCHER v. COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA.

1. CRIMINAL LAW — Confession — Confession Not Voluntary — Case at Bar. The instant case was a trial for murder. The fundamental question upon appeal was whether the trial court erred in admitting an alleged confession of the accused to be introduced in evidence. The testimony of the Commonwealth's attorney showed that, though he might not have made any express promise of immunity, or light punishment to the accused, he intentionally so conducted his conversations with the brother of the accused, and with the accused, and so shaped his language as to raise in the mind of the accused the hope and belief that, if he told what he knew about this crime and testified in behalf of the Commonwealth against the others who were implicated by his statement, he would not be prosecuted. A confession procured under such circumstances is not in law a voluntary confession, and is not admissible.

Held: That the judgment of conviction should be set aside.

2. CRIMINAL LAW — Confession — Confession Not Voluntary — Admission as Harmless Error — Case at Bar. The instant case was a trial for murder. The fundamental question upon appeal was whether the trial court erred in admitting an alleged confession of the accused to be introduced in evidence. The Commonwealth introduced a number of witnesses, but there was no evidence sufficient to establish a connection of accused with the killing of deceased except his confession and the testimony of three witnesses. If believed, the testimony of these three, or of any of them, was sufficient, without accused's confession, to support a verdict finding accused guilty, along with them, of the murder of deceased. But, had the confession not been admitted, the jury might not have believed the testimony of any of these witnesses who had just been convicted of murdering deceased and sentenced to serve terms of twenty years in the penitentiary, as the direct result of disclosures made by or testimony given by accused. In addition, while two of the witnesses, who had been confined in the same cell, told the same story, their testimony and that given by the other witness was in conflict in many important particulars.

Held: That though it was probable that the jury would have found the same verdict, had accused's confession been excluded, it could not be said, as a matter of law, that the admission of the confession was harmless error.

3. CONFESSIONS — Confession Obtained under Promise of Immunity — Admissibility of Confession against an Accomplice — Case at Bar. — In the instant case accused had testified against an alleged accomplice. The evidence showed that the testimony of accused was secured by the Commonwealth's attorney while accused was under arrest charged with having committed the same crime by leading him, both by words and conduct, to believe that, if he so testified as to fixing the crime on others, he would not be prosecuted himself, and that he testified against the accomplice under the influence of such a belief. In view of what the Commonwealth's attorney knew had taken place, he should not have permitted accused's testimony to have gone to the jury without any intimation to it that he was testifying under the belief that by so doing he himself would escape punishment or receive only a light punishment. If the practice followed in this case should be indulged in by prosecuting attorneys and tolerated by the courts, it would jeopardize the lives and liberties of innocent men and women everywhere.

Error to a judgment of the Circuit Court of Franklin county.

The opinion states the case.

Paul Johnson, B. A. Davis and B. A. Davis, Jr., for the plaintiff in error.

John R. Saunders, Attorney-General, and Edwin H. Gibson and Collins Denny, Jr., Assistant Attorneys-General, for the Commonwealth.

EPES, J., delivered the opinion of the court.

This is a writ of error to a judgment of the Circuit Court of Franklin county sentencing William Belcher to serve five years in the penitentiary for the murder of James Leslie Patterson.

The fundamental question raised upon this writ of error is: Did the court err in admitting an alleged confession of the accused to be introduced in evidence? The relevant facts are these:

For some months prior to December 26, 1931, James Leslie Patterson, an old man, had lived alone in a log cabin which was situated in a lonely place at the foot of Turkey-cock Mountain, in Franklin county, Virginia. In this general locality a number of illicit stills had been destroyed by the officers, and on December 22, 1931, they had raided a still located near Patterson's cabin and arrested Noell Barbour (a white man) and Henry Becker (a negro) as the operators of it.

The road leading to Patterson's cabin turns off from the "big road" at or near the home of a negro named Jesse Pinkard, runs by the home of Charlie Haynes, and then to or by Patterson's cabin.

James Leslie Patterson was last seen alive about eleven a.m., December 25, 1931. On the afternoon of the 26th his dead body was found lying across the bed in his cabin with wounds in its left side made by several hundred number six shot. The character of the wounds showed that he had been shot several times. Wads from shells for a twelve gauge shotgun were found in the yard of the cabin, and a pistol bullet had pierced the front door of the cabin, passed about a foot above his bed, and lodged in the wall. But no clue was found about the premises which pointed to the person or persons who had fired these shots.

In their search for the perpetrators of this crime the officers proceeded upon the theory that he had been killed by persons who suspected him of having reported their still; and, after an investigation lasting approximately thirty days, they arrested four white men, Noell Barbour, William Belcher, Buster Patterson and Leonard Mason, upon the charge of having murdered him.

William Belcher had been raised in this community, but had gone to Roanoke about seven years before this occurrence, and was at that time employed by the Norfolk and Western Railway Company. His father still lived in this neighborhood, and on December 25th Belcher had driven over from Roanoke in his automobile to his father's home to spend the Christmas holidays and go hunting. About eleven o'clock that night he was seen with Noell Barbour at Jess Pinkard's house, where a negro dance was going on. Buster Patterson and several other white people and the negroes, Henry and Lewis Becker, were also there. A little later William Belcher and Noell Barbour were seen driving off in Belcher's blue Chrysler touring car, going in a direction opposite to that of Patterson's cabin. About one a.m. a touring car was seen to turn into the road leading from Jess Pinkard's house to Patterson's cabin and to pass the house of Charlie Haynes; but no witness was able to identify this car or tell who was in it. About two a.m. Charlie Haynes, and another person who was at his house, saw the lights of an automobile which was coming along this road from the direction of Patterson's cabin and going toward Jess Pinkard's house.

Horace Patterson, a son of the deceased, lived about five miles from his father's cabin. He testified that on December 26th William Belcher came by his home and told him that "he come by to let us know that Noell Barbour, Buster Patterson and some hunters had said they had gone by there and found my father dead over there"; but Belcher did not tell him anything about the cause of his father's death.

So far as the record discloses, these were about all the facts which were known to the officers and the Commonwealth's attorney when the four men above named were arrested. Though they seem to have suspected that the negroes, Henry and Lewis Becker, were also implicated, they evidently had no evidence which they deemed sufficient to warrant their arrest.

William Belcher was arrested and lodged in jail in Rocky Mount on January 25th or 26th. On the same day his brother, Irving S. Belcher, who is a policeman of Roanoke, learned of his arrest and came to Rocky Mount, where he had a conference with Mr. Carter Lee, the Commonwealth's attorney of Franklin county. After this conference he went to see his brother in the jail, and soon thereafter called Mr. Lee into William's cell. There, in the presence of Irving Belcher, William made a statement to Mr. Lee regarding his knowledge of and connection with the killing of James Leslie Patterson. After he had made this statement he was released on $15,000 bail; Buster Patterson and Leonard Mason were released from custody; and Henry and Lewis Becker were charged with the murder of Patterson and committed to jail. In this connection it may be noted that Mr. Lee admitted that he knew at the time that the sureties on Belcher's bail bond were not worth the penalty of the bond.

A few days later Mr. Lee came to Roanoke where he saw Irving Belcher and got him to get his brother William to meet him at the office of a Mr. Johnston, the finger print expert of the city police department. There, in the presence of Mr. L. R. Morris, a lieutenant of the city police force, and Irving Belcher, William Belcher again made his statement to Mr. Lee, who made written memoranda of what he told him. Morris made no memoranda of what was said, and testified from his memory, which he stated was incomplete and not clear on a number of points. According to his testimony William Belcher made the following statement to Mr. Lee:

He (William Belcher) came from Roanoke to Franklin county on Christmas afternoon and brought with him his gun to go hunting. At Rocky Mount he met up with Noell Barbour, who asked him if he would "carry him down the road somewhere" that night, and he told him he probably would. He saw Barbour that night at a dance and Barbour asked him "was he going to carry...

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 cases
  • Williams v. Com.
    • United States
    • Virginia Supreme Court
    • September 4, 1987
    ... Page 361 ... 360 S.E.2d 361 ... 234 Va. 168 ... Terry WILLIAMS ... COMMONWEALTH of Virginia ... Record Nos. 870102, 870103 ... Supreme Court of Virginia ... Sept. 4, 1987 ... Page 363 ...         [234 Va ... based on supposed facts proven untrue and is incredible." 1 Id. at 378, 46 S.E.2d at 403. In Belcher v. Commonwealth, 160 Va. 891, 168 S.E. 468 (1933), we found that a Commonwealth's Attorney had; ... intentionally so conducted his conversations ... ...
  • Kauffmann v. Com.
    • United States
    • Virginia Court of Appeals
    • July 11, 1989
    ... Page 279 ... 382 S.E.2d 279 ... 8 Va.App. 400 ... Paul James KAUFFMANN, Jr ... COMMONWEALTH of Virginia ... Record No. 0121-87-4 ... Court of Appeals of Virginia ... July 11, 1989 ... Page 280 ...         [8 Va.App ... Id. at 1020, 81 S.E. at 194. Thus, in Belcher v. Commonwealth, 160 Va. 891, 168 S.E. 468 (1933), the Supreme Court held that implicit promises of leniency made during an interrogation render the ... ...
  • Harrison v. Com., 0805-85
    • United States
    • Virginia Court of Appeals
    • October 7, 1986
    ...349 S.E.2d 167 ... 3 Va.App. 260 ... Reginald Thomas HARRISON ... COMMONWEALTH of Virginia ... Record No. 0805-85 ... Court of Appeals of Virginia ... Oct. 7, 1986 ...         [3 Va.App. 261] Gary R. Hershner ... He relies upon Jackson v. Commonwealth, 116 Va. 1015, 81 S.E. 192 (1914), Belcher v. Commonwealth, 160 Va. 891, 168 S.E. 468 (1933), and Grades v. Boles, 398 F.2d 409 (4th Cir.1968) to support his position ...         In ... ...
  • Wooden v. Com.
    • United States
    • Virginia Supreme Court
    • March 4, 1968
    ...159 S.E.2d 623 ... 208 Va. 629 ... Baker Junior WOODEN ... COMMONWEALTH of Virginia ... Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia ... March 4, 1968 ...         Thomas J. Middleton, Jr., Fairfax (LaRue Van Meter, ... Commonwealth, 206 Va. 470, 144 S.E.2d 303 (1965); Belcher v. Commonwealth, 160 Va. 891, 168 S.E. 468 (1933); Cullen v. Commonwealth, 65 Va. (24 Gratt.) 624 (1873) ...         The trial judge ... ...

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