Hintz v. State

• Decision Date: 23 June 1905
• Citation: 125 Wis. 405,104 N.W. 110
• Parties: HINTZ v. STATE.
• Court: Wisconsin Supreme Court

125 Wis. 405

104 N.W. 110

HINTZ

v.STATE.

Supreme Court of Wisconsin.

June 23, 1905.

Error to Circuit Court, Waukesha County; James J. Dick, Judge.

Charles Hintz was convicted of murder in the third degree, and he brings error. Affirmed.

The accused was convicted of murder in the third degree, and sentenced to imprisonment in the State Prison at Waupun for the term of 14 years. He complains of error. It appears from the record: That one Henry Piske and wife, Augusta Piske, prior to August 1, 1903, lived upon a 10–acre tract of land, with a house and other buildings thereon, in Muskego, Waukesha county, Wis. That they had known the accused for several years prior to August 1, 1903. On the day last mentioned the accused visited the Piskes, and took dinner with them. Mr. Piske was at work in the field, about 16 rods from the residence. After dinner Mrs. Piske went to the field where her husband was at work, but soon returned to the house; the accused being there with her. Afterwards, and about 2 o'clock, the accused went to the field, and tried to hire a horse from Mr. Piske to go to Hale's Corners, which was refused, after which he left the premises, and Mr. Piske went to the house in search of his wife, and found her lying on the floor, dead. It was discovered that she had been shot, and that $4 in silver and $12 in paper money were missing. That in the afternoon of August 1, 1903, about 15 minutes before 3 o'clock, accused called on one John Martin, who lived on the road between the Piske farm and Hale's Corners, and tried to hire Martin to take him to Hale's Corners, so he could catch a car to Chicago. Martin declined to do so, and the accused started on the run. He was arrested at Lake City, Minn., August 11, 1903, and taken to Milwaukee, arriving there at 5 p. m., and was immediately taken to the police station. On the following morning, when brought up for the purpose of being taken to Waukesha, he was asked if he wanted to make a statement, and he said “Yes.” He made a statement to the chief of police, Janssen, and the sheriff; a stenographer also being present. After making the first statement, he made a second, only five minutes after the first. The accused was taken from the police station in Milwaukee to Waukesha, and from there he went to the Piske farm, accompanied by M. L. Snyder, mayor of Waukesha, and Wm. Scholl and Geo. Dwinnell, sheriff and undersheriff of Waukesha county, and on the way made certain confessions. He testified on the trial in his own behalf, in effect, that he was at the Piske farm August 1st, and to the occurrences there before the shooting; that when he and Mrs. Piske returned from the field she went into the house, and he stopped at the pigpen, and while there heard a shot, and shortly afterwards saw a man come from the front part of the house, going towards the gate; that he went into the house, and saw Mrs. Piske lying on the floor; that he left the house much frightened, and went into the field, but did not dare to tell Mr. Piske; that he did not know what he said to him; that he was in a hurry to get away; that he arrived in Milwaukee in the evening, saw his sister, and gave her $10 to turn over to his mother, stayed in Milwaukee part of the evening, and during the night went out on a freight train; that he was afraid of being arrested, and went away as fast as he could. He admitted that he had a revolver when at the Piske farm, but claimed it was not loaded, and that he turned it over to a young lady with whom he spent the evening in Milwaukee. He also gave his version of the alleged confessions, and the circumstances under which they were given.Henry Lockney (A. Kanneberg, of counsel), for plaintiff in error.

L. M. Sturdevant, Atty. Gen., and Walter D. Corrigan, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.

KERWIN, J. (after stating the facts).

1. It is claimed by the accused that the court erred in the admission of evidence on the part of the state to prove certain alleged confessions made to witnesses Wm. Scholl, Geo. Dwinnell, and M. L. Snyder. After Mr. Snyderlearned that the accused had been taken from Milwaukee to Waukesha, he saw the sheriff, and expressed a desire to see him. He went to the jail in the afternoon, and had a conversation with the accused. He also accompanied the sheriff, undersheriff, and accused to the Piske farm. Before starting, it appears, Mr. Snyder warned the prisoner that he was under no obligation to make any statement, saying to him: “Charles, remember that whatever you do or say at this time must be entirely a voluntary declaration on your part. You are under no obligation to testify, or to accompany the sheriff to the Piske farm. You are under no obligation whatever to say anything in regard to this occurrence.” To which the accused nodded his assent, and said: “Yes; that is so.” And further: “You are under no obligation to say anything, or go anywhere, or to do anything whatever in this matter at the present time. Whatever you do must be entirely voluntary and a free act on your part.” To which the accused answered: “Yes.” These conversations in which Mr. Snyder warned the accused were before any statement had been made by him. It appears that afterwards, and on the way to the farm, the accused made certain confessions, and talked freely concerning the crime, and also, after arriving at the farm, described the premises. Mr. Snyder was put on the stand by the state to prove these confessions, and, before the testimony was admitted, counsel for the accused asked for a preliminary inquiry as to whether there was any inducement offered, which was granted. Upon such inquiry before the court the matter was gone into concerning conversations had between Mr. Snyder and the accused before going to the Piske farm, and facts with regard to the warning hereinbefore stated were testified to by Mr. Snyder. It also developed upon this inquiry that, after the accused had been arrested and taken to Milwaukee, conversations were had between him, the sheriff, and Chief of Police Janssen, of Milwaukee, in which the accused voluntarily made a statement, a stenographer being present; and about five minutes after making the first statement he made a second. After making the first statement, the sheriff testified he said to him: “ ‘You might as well tell the truth, Charlie. I think it would be better for you’––or something like that; and he said, ‘Do you think it would be better to tell the truth?’ and I said, ‘The truth is always better.’ He said, ‘Do you think it would do me any good?’ and I said, ‘I think the truth is always the best.’ I cannot remember exactly. I think that is about the way. He said: ‘Call the chief back. I will tell just how it happened, and what I done.’ ” The sheriff also testified that he did not make the accused any promises whatever. There is no evidence in the case as to what confessions, if any, were made in Milwaukee––the only evidence brought out by defendant on the preliminary inquiry being that the accused made two statements––but what these statements were, or whether the same or different from the statements afterwards made on the way to the Piske premises, or whether they amounted to a confession, does not appear. The court below very properly held that there was no evidence of any confessions made at Milwaukee, and the question is whether the confessions made on the trip to the farm were admissible. It must be conceded that the first statement made at Milwaukee was freely and voluntarily made, and there is nothing in the record to show that it was different from the one made on the way to the farm; nor can it be said from the record that the second statement at Milwaukee was not corroborative of the first. True, the sheriff testified that accused said after making the first statement that he wanted to make a different one, but what statement he did...