Jasper v. Com.
| Decision Date | 24 September 1971 |
| Citation | 471 S.W.2d 7 |
| Parties | Hoy JASPER, Appellant, v. COMMONWEALTH of Kentucky, Appellee. |
| Court | United States State Supreme Court — District of Kentucky |
W. C. Dabney, Bruce H. Phillips, Monticello, for appellant.
John B. Breckinridge, Atty. Gen., Mark F. Armstrong, Asst. Atty. Gen., Frankfort, for appellee.
The only question presented upon this appeal is whether certain admissions made to police officers after appellant's arrest were freely and voluntarily given by the accused and whether his waiver of his right to have counsel present was intelligently and voluntarily made. The facts of the situation are as follows:
On December 1, 1969, appellant Hoy Jasper, along with his brother Boyd Jasper and Larry Lewis, was indicted by the Wayne County Grand Jury and charged with grand larceny of a 1966 Pontiac automobile belonging to Michael Gregory. Appellant was convicted of these charges and sentenced to four years in the state penitentiary. He now contends that on the occasion of his arrest in August 1969 he was taken to the jail in Pulaski County and there interrogated without the presence of counsel and that certain admissions made at that time were wrongfully permitted to be introduced in evidence against him. The interrogation is alleged to have been conducted by Samuel E. King, a detective for the Kentucky State Police, in the presence of John Henry Johnson, a deputy sheriff of Pulaski County, and Dee Haste, a patrolman on the Somerset city police force.
At the commencement of the trial counsel for appellant moved to suppress evidence of the admissions and requested a hearing out of the presence of the jury. The trial court granted this request and conducted a hearing for the purpose of determining the admissibility of the questioned evidence. We believe this procedure proper and it is not questioned. See Bradley v. Commonwealth, Ky., 439 S.W.2d 61, p. 64. At the hearing the arresting officer testified that prior to any questioning he advised the accused that he did not have to make a statement and that any statement he made could be used against him in court. Also, he had a right to counsel and if he could not afford it counsel would be furnished for him.
The officer further testified that he believed the accused understood the statement and that at no time did the accused request counsel or indicate in any way that he desired counsel present. All statements made by him at this time were freely and voluntarily given. He further testified that there was a telephone available to the accused but that he in no way indicated that he desired to use it; that the accused is an adult under Kentucky law, being 19 years of age; that he had previously been convicted of a felony and served time in the Kentucky State Reformatory and was, at the time the present offense was alleged to have been committed, on parole.
Appellant himself does not deny that he made the confessions to the officers. He does on this appeal deny that they were true and now asserts that he made them in order to cover up for his brother, whom he then thought might be guilty.
The other officers who were present at the examination testified upon this hearing. Their testimony substantiates that of the state detective. The appellant was permitted to call witnesses and did so . There is some conflict between the testimony offered by the defense and that offered by the prosecution. At the conclusion of this hearing the trial court determined that appellant was fully advised...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Short v. Com.
... ... Gray, Ky., 296 S.W.2d 735 (1956). In is well established that a jury trial may be waived in a misdemeanor case. Ashton v. Commonwealth, Ky., 405 S.W.2d 562 (1966). An accused may also waive his right to freedom from self-incrimination, Kentucky Constitution Section 11, Jasper v. Commonwealth, Ky., 471 S.W.2d 7 (1971); his right against unreasonable search and seizure, Kentucky Constitution Section 10, Fugate v. Commonwealth, 294 Ky. 410, 171 S.W.2d 1020 (1943), Hall v. Commonwealth, Ky., 261 S.W.2d 677 (1953); his right to counsel, Kentucky Constitution Section 11, ... ...
-
Skaggs v. Com., 82-SC-917-MR
...counsel as well as his right to remain silent once an investigation focuses on him. However, these rights may be waived. Jasper v. Commonwealth, Ky., 471 S.W.2d 7 (1971). The fact that one suspected of a crime has no attorney present does not prevent him from confessing his crime if he does......
-
Callihan v. Com.
...Cir. 2000), Wills v. Commonwealth, Ky., 502 S.W.2d 60 (1973), Wilson v. Commonwealth, Ky., 476 S.W.2d 622 (1971), and Jasper v. Commonwealth, Ky., 471 S.W.2d 7 (1971), require otherwise. In Farler v. Commonwealth, Ky.App., 880 S.W.2d 882 (1994), the Court of Appeals, expressly addressing al......
- Hodge v. Craig