Clemons v. State, 48580
| Citation | 316 So.2d 252 |
| Decision Date | 14 July 1975 |
| Docket Number | No. 48580,48580 |
| Parties | Mary H. CLEMONS v. STATE of Mississippi. |
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of Mississippi |
Bernard Gautier, Pascagoula, for appellant.
A. F. Summer, Atty. Gen. by Catherine Walker, Sp. Asst. Atty. Gen., Jackson, for appellee.
Before GILLESPIE, SMITH and WALKER, JJ.
The appellant Mary H. Clemons was convicted in the Circuit Court of Jackson County, Mississippi, of murdering one Ricky Robinson, a cab driver, during an armed robbery which netted her fourteen dollars and some change. She was sentenced to life in the state penitentiary. We affirm.
The appellant's primary assignment of error is that the trial court erred in not overruling her motion to suppress a confession which was admitted into evidence. Her contentions in this regard are threefold: (1) that the extent and duration of the officers' questioning, despite her repeated denials, amounted to undue coercion; (2) that she was intimidated into not calling an attorney and thereby denied the assistance of counsel; and (3) that she was induced to make the statement by a promise of leniency.
The appellant contends that under the totality of these circumstances that the confession was involuntary and inadmissible. However, each of the officers who interrogated the appellant or who was present at the time of the interrogations, testified and categorically denied that the appellant had been abused or mistreated in any manner; or that she had been promised leniency; or that she had been coerced or intimidated.
This conflicting evidence presented a question of fact to be determined by the trial judge who was in the best position to observe the witnesses as they testified. We have consistently held that where evidence is conflicting on the question of whether a confession was voluntarily made, that the issue is to be determined by the trial court; and upon review, this Court will not disturb the trial court's finding unless it appears to be contrary to the evidence. Ivey v. State, 246 Miss. 117, 149 So.2d 520 (1963).
We have thoroughly examined the record with regard to appellant's contention that her confession was not voluntary and are unable to say that the trial court's finding was against the overwhelming weight of the evidence. We are therefore of the opinion that appellant's confession was properly admitted into evidence.
The appellant readily concedes that she was advised, on several occasions, of her rights...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Reddix v. State
...for the absence of any such witness. See also Holmes v. State, 211 Miss. 436, 51 So.2d 755 (1951). (185 So.2d at 673). In Clemons v. State, 316 So.2d 252 (Miss.1975), the rule was also stated: This conflicting evidence presented a question of fact to be determined by the trial judge who was......
-
Bullock v. State, 51937
...and voluntarily given. The court's finding was supported by the evidence, and we cannot overrule or disturb that finding. Clemons v. State, 316 So.2d 252 (Miss.1975). Appellant testified in his own defense at both phases of the trial. His testimony was practically identical with that of his......
-
Booker v. State
...it will not be overturned. See Harrigill v. State, 381 So.2d 619 (Miss.1980); Curry v. State, 328 So.2d 328 (Miss.1976); Clemons v. State, 316 So.2d 252 (Miss.1975). We are unable to say that the trial court's ruling was contrary to the evidence. Accordingly, his finding will not be The app......
-
Gavin v. State
...given findings of fact made by a trial judge sitting without a jury. See Jones v. State, 461 So.2d 686, 697 (Miss.1984); Clemons v. State, 316 So.2d 252, 253 (Miss.1975). In the case at bar the trial judge made no such findings. Rather, at the conclusion of the in camera suppression hearing......