Commonwealth v. Ritter
Decision Date | 07 July 1975 |
Citation | 462 Pa. 202,340 A.2d 433 |
Parties | COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania v. Melvin H. RITTER, Jr., Appellant. |
Court | Pennsylvania Supreme Court |
Allen H. Smith, York, for appellant.
Donald L. Reihart, Dist. Atty., York, Sheryl A. Dorney, for appellee.
Before JONES C.J., and EAGEN, O'BRIEN, ROBERTS and POMEROY, JJ.
Appellant Melvin H. Ritter, Jr., was tried by a judge and jury and found guilty of two counts of voluntary manslaughter. Post-trial motions were denied and appellant was sentenced to two concurrent terms of six to twelve years' imprisonment. This appeal followed.
The facts surrounding this appeal are as follows. On November 17, 1972 at approximately 6:00 a.m., a fire broke out in a four-story apartment building at 15 South West Street in the City of York, Pennsylvania. As a result of this fire, two residents in the apartment building were killed. An investigation of the fire revealed that it had been the result of arson and that appellant, also a resident in the building, confessed to Pennsylvania State Police that he had started the fire by setting fire to boxes in a closet within the apartment building. Based on certain other evidence, appellant was tried and convicted of two counts of voluntary manslaughter.
Appellant argues that his confession should have been suppressed as not being voluntary because of his mental and physical condition at the time it was given. We agree. Appellant was arrested by officers of the Pennsylvania State Police on November 21 1972, and arrived at police headquarters around midnight on the evening of the 21st of November. At that time, he was given his constitutional rights and he subsequently confessed to the arson. Based on the testimony of Officer Soprano, who conducted the interrogation of appellant, we are of the opinion that appellant's confession was not voluntarily given. Officer Soprano, testifying at appellant's suppression hearing, stated that after he initially spoke with appellant, he decided that appellant had a psychiatric problem and, in fact, tried to reach a psychiatrist prior to questioning appellant. In addition, the officer stated that during the course of the interrogation, appellant was whimpering, sobbing and 'really looked tired.' Moreover, the officer stated that appellant had not slept for three days prior to his interrogation, which occurred from 12:00 midnight to 3:00 a.m. on the morning of the 22nd of November, 1972.
In Commonwealth v. Alston, 456 Pa. 128, 317 A.2d 241 (1974), this Court stated the following test for determining whether a confession is voluntary:
At page 131, 317 A.2d at page 243.
In the facts of the instant case, appellant's will was not overborne by direct police conduct during the interrogation. However the testimony of the interrogating officer himself established that appellant was in no condition to knowingly and voluntarily confess to a crime, since appellant was, in the officer's own opinion, in dire need of psychiatric help and exhausted. The officer testified at the suppression hearing as...
To continue reading
Request your trial