Hecox v. State

• Decision Date: 13 October 1898
• Parties: HECOX v. STATE.
• Court: Georgia Supreme Court

31 S.E. 592

105 Ga. 625

HECOX v. STATE.

Supreme Court of Georgia

October 13, 1898

Syllabus by the Court.

1. A confession of guilt by the accused, freely and voluntarily made, is admissible in evidence against him, although such confession is coupled with the proposition on his part to settle or compromise the case or charge against him; such an offer of settlement not being induced by another.

2. If after a money-changing transaction between A. and B. (whereby the former delivered to the latter two bills in exchange for smaller bills and a coin) had been completed, B., with the consent of A., either express or implied, took from his possession, ostensibly and as A. supposed, for the purpose of recounting the same, the smaller bills and the coin, but really with the intention of fraudulently retaining and appropriating to his own use three of these bills, and if, in pursuance of such intention, B. carried away the three bills with intent to steal the same, he was guilty of simple larceny.

Error from criminal court of Atlanta; J. D. Berry, Judge.

B. L Hecox was convicted of larceny, and he brings error. Affirmed.

Thos. L. Bishop and Geo. P. Roberts, for plaintiff in error.

Jas. F. O'Neill, for the State.

LEWIS J.

1. It is insisted in this case that the confession of the accused was improperly admitted, inasmuch as it was done under a hope of benefit,--that his case might thereby be settled without a prosecution. It was not pretended that any such hope was induced by the witness or any other party. If any existed, it was entirely within the breast of the defendant himself. The confession was entirely voluntary, and, under section 1006 of the Penal Code, in order for a hope of benefit or a fear of injury to render it inadmissible, such hope or fear must be induced by another. Bohanan v. State, 92 Ga. 28, 18 S.E. 302. Chief Justice Bleckley, in delivering the opinion, on page 32, 92 Ga., and on page 303, 18 S.E. , said: "If a man rears a crop of hope in his own mind from seeds of his own planting, and under its influence makes a confession, this will not exclude the confession as evidence. The hope that excludes is that, and that only, which some other person kindles or excites."

2. It is further contended in this case that the facts make it one of a cheat and swindle, or some crime other than simple larceny. Under the facts of the present case, there is no question but that the...