Harris v. State

Decision Date25 March 1994
Docket NumberCR-92-1363
Citation649 So.2d 1315
PartiesWillie Edward HARRIS v. STATE.
CourtAlabama Court of Criminal Appeals

Milburn Gross, Jr., Andalusia, for appellant.

James H. Evans, Atty. Gen., and Gregory O. Griffin, Sr., Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

McMILLAN, Judge.

The appellant, Willie Edward Harris, was convicted of theft of property, in violation of § 13A-8-3, Code of Alabama 1975, and was sentenced to 15 years' imprisonment.

I

The appellant contends that the trial court erred in admitting evidence of his oral confession and all subsequent evidence derived from that confession.

A State's witness, Richard White, chief investigator for the Covington County Sheriff's Department, testified that on the date of the appellant's arrest, October 12, 1992, after reading him his Miranda rights, he took the appellant's statement. Subsequently, outside the presence of the jury, a hearing was held regarding the admissibility of evidence of the appellant's admission. Pertinent testimony from the two witnesses at that hearing is as follows:

Porter Harris, chief investigator with the Covington County District Attorney's Office, testified on direct examination, that on October 16, 1992, in response to the appellant's letter to the district attorney requesting a preliminary hearing, he went to the Covington County jail and filled out an indigency form for him. He testified that "it [was] part of [his] job to go over to the jail and interview the defendant [and] to fill out a questionnaire form so the court [could] determine whether ... [a] defendant is eligible to hire his own counsel...." He testified that he had been performing this duty for the district court judge for "almost 12 years."

Regarding the particulars of his interview at the jail with the appellant, Porter Harris was cross-examined as follows:

"Q What was the first thing you told Willie?

"A When we got into the room--they put us in a room with a table....

"....

"Q Now, you tell him who you are?

"A 'I am Porter Harris with the Covington County District Attorney's office. The district court has received your letter requesting a preliminary hearing. I am here to fill this form out. Before I fill the questionnaire form out I want you to understand what your constitutional rights are, sir.' I explained to him what his rights are and then I asked does he want to talk to me and we go from there.

"Q Now why, if you are filling out a form for the court, do you advise him of his constitutional rights?

"A Because there are questions to be answered [on] that form, that is normal procedure. I don't talk to anybody without advising them of their rights regardless to what it is. If he is a defendant I advise him of his rights.

"Q Are you asking these questions as an investigator for the district attorney's office?

"A I am asking the questions for the district court I assume, because they are the ones that send me over to get the form filled out. There is no one else to do it.

"Q After you filled out the form as far as the questionnaire or whatever, did you talk to [the appellant] about [the victim]?

"A Mr. Harris stated to me, 'I might as well come clean, man. You know I took the wallet.'

"Q That was before you asked him any questions or anything like that?

"A That was after I completed the questionnaire form."

Subsequently, the trial judge asked Porter Harris the following questions:

"THE COURT: You told him that you were Porter Harris, an investigator with the district attorney's office and what; go from there.

"MR. P. HARRIS: That the district court had received his letter requesting a preliminary hearing and that I had come over to fill the questionnaire form out to take back to the district court to determine whether or not he was eligible to hire his own attorney or if the court was going to have to appoint him an attorney to represent him at the preliminary hearing.

"THE COURT: Was this before or after you read him his rights?

"MR. P. HARRIS: I read him his rights after I made that statement to him. I wanted him to know why I was there, what my purpose was for being there.

"THE COURT: Then what is the next thing that happened?

"MR. P. HARRIS: And I read him his rights. After I explained that, I read him his rights.

"THE COURT: Then what is the next thing that happened?

"MR. P. HARRIS: Then I proceeded to ask him the questions on the questionnaire form.

"THE COURT: Now at what point in time did this business come out? Did you have any other discussion with him about what you were doing there or why you were there or what you wanted?

"MR. P. HARRIS: No, sir. After I completed the questionnaire form on the front, over on the back it states--and I explained to him, 'this applies to you here--It is my desire at this time to have counsel appointed by the court to represent me on the above charges. In support of this request I have answered the preceding questions relating to my ability to pay. I swear or affirm that these answers are true and reflect my present financial status. I understand that a false statement or answer to any questions in this affidavit may subject me to penalties for perjury. I authorize, if necessary, the court or its authorized representative to obtain records or information pertaining to my financial status from any source.' And then I asked him does he understand that and he said 'Yes.' And he signs it here and then it is sworn before me, a notary public. I am a notary public.

"THE COURT: And this is the form for requesting appointment of counsel?

"MR. P. HARRIS: Yes, sir, it is.

"THE COURT: What happened then? What is the next thing that happened?

"MR. P. HARRIS: 'I might as well come clean with you, man. I did get the man's wallet, but I didn't use force, I didn't use a weapon. I just walked up to him and asked him to give me his wallet. He pulled his wallet out [of] his back pocket and gave it to me and I walked off with it.'

"THE COURT: Did you ask him any questions?

"MR. P. HARRIS: No, sir.

"THE COURT: Did you attempt to question him in any manner other than to help fill out this affidavit of indigence?

"MR. P. HARRIS: I stopped him and told him he needed to talk to Investigator Terry Langford with the sheriff's department.

"THE COURT: But what I am saying is did you question him in any way at any time?

"MR. P. HARRIS: No, sir."

Subsequently, on re-cross-examination, Porter Harris was asked:

"Q Porter, is this your signature on this?

"A Yes, sir, it is.

"Q What does this say underneath it?

"A Judge or notary.

"Q Judge/notary.

"A Yes.

"Q Did you tell him whether you were acting as a judge or a notary or did you just have him sign it and then you signed it?

"A I signed it witnessing his signature. I did not tell him that I was a judge.

"Q You didn't tell him that you were a notary, right? You just signed it, right?

"A Right, that's correct."

Next, Terry Langford, a deputy with the Covington County Sheriff's Department, was asked, in pertinent part, the following questions on cross-examination:

"Q Now, Terry, why did you go over to the jail that day?

"A Porter Harris had called me and wanted to meet with me over at the jail.

"Q Did he tell you why?

"A Yes, sir.

"Q What did he tell you?

"A He told me that he had had a conversation [with] Willie Harris and that Willie wanted to take us and show us where he had put the wallet and had thrown the wallet out.

"Q That he wanted to?

"A Yes, sir.

"Q Did [he] tell you anything else about the conversation?

"A He said that he wanted to tell us what happened, what actually happened and Porter said that he wanted to get us over there before that actually took place.

"Q Had you talked to Porter about this case at any time before that?

"A Not to my knowledge.

"Q You just don't remember?

"A Yes, sir.

"Q But the reason why you went over there was because Porter called you and told you that [Harris] wanted to make a statement?

"A Yes, sir.

"....

"Q [Y]ou and Porter went in and you advised him of his rights [orally]?

"A Right.

"Q Did you fill out a form or anything then?

"A No.

"Q Did you know why Porter was there?

"A He told me that he had to set a preliminary hearing.

"Q Did you say anything to Mr. Harris about the preliminary hearing or anything?

"A Not to my knowledge no, sir.

"Q Now was Porter with Willie Harris when you got there?

"A I believe Willie was in a room, in one of the rooms at the county jail.

"Q Was Porter with him when you got there?

"A I don't think so.

"Q You don't think so. You are not sure?

"A No, I'm not sure.

"Q Terry, you went over there and you met Porter on the steps, is that what you told us?

"A Right.

"Q Then what did y'all do?

"A He told me that [Harris] wanted to make a statement. So I went in.

"....

"Q Did y'all walk in to where Willie was together?

"A Yes.

"Q Y'all went into the room where Willie was together?

"....

"Q Then who was the first person to speak when y'all walked in together?

"A I believe Porter said that Willie has made a statement to me that he wanted to show us, meaning me.

"Q And him?

"A What?

"Q And him because he was there?

"A Right. Where he had thrown the wallet and he wanted to make a statement and tell exactly what happened on Friday afternoon.

"....

"Q Then what happened then?

"A I read him his rights and we walked outside, myself and Investigator Bledsole. Went to my car and he told us how to get to where he had thrown it, George Street or Searcy Street, which ever one you want to say it; how to get there.

"Q When did Porter leave?

"A When we left the jail it was just myself and Investigator Bledsole and Mr. Harris. Porter, to my knowledge, stayed at the jail or left after we did."

Langford further testified that after he advised the appellant of his rights, the appellant went with him and showed him where the stolen wallet was located. Langford testified that he then immediately took the appellant back to jail where he made a taped statement, confessing his guilt.

Following the hearing, the trial...

To continue reading

Request your trial
2 cases
  • Scott v. State
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals
    • January 17, 1997
    ...the conviction. The principles governing our review of the sufficiency of circumstantial evidence are set out in Harris v. State, 649 So.2d 1315, 1321-22 (Ala.Cr.App.1994), as "`"`The standard for appellate review of the sufficiency of the evidence in a case such as this one was aptly set o......
  • Worthington v. State
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals
    • September 9, 1994
    ...in a stabbing. Additionally, the appellant contends that the evidence established that he acted in self-defense. In Harris v. State, 649 So.2d 1315, 1321-22 (Ala.Cr.App.1994), this Court set forth the legal principles governing the review of a conviction based on circumstantial evidence. Ap......

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