Murry v. State, 2 Div. 222
Court | Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals |
Citation | 367 So.2d 985 |
Docket Number | 2 Div. 222 |
Parties | Eddie MURRY v. STATE. |
Decision Date | 19 December 1978 |
Frank L. Thiemonge, III, Montgomery, for appellant.
William J. Baxley, Atty. Gen. and Eugenia D. B. Hofammann, Asst. Atty. Gen. for the State, appellee.
Appellant was indicted by the grand jury of Dallas County, Alabama, for perjury. The indictment, omitting the formal parts, states that:
The statement referred to in Count I of the indictment is set out below:
Subsequently, appellant was duly arraigned, in the presence of counsel, and he entered a plea of not guilty to the charge against him. Appellant received a trial by jury and was found guilty "as charged in the indictment," appellant having made no motion that the State elect which count should go to the jury. The trial court in accord with the jury's verdict adjudged appellant guilty and sentenced him to five years of imprisonment in the penitentiary. Appellant having been found indigent by the trial court is before this Court with appointed counsel and a free transcript.
A summary of the evidence follows, appellant preserving the question of sufficiency of the evidence through a motion to exclude and motion for new trial.
Sarah M. Greenhaw testified that she was employed as an Assistant Attorney General. On August 9, 1977, Mrs. Greenhaw tried the case of State versus Will Travis, CC-77-42, in Dallas County, on a charge of forgery. Appellant was a duly sworn witness in that trial. During the course of that trial the court allowed Mrs. Greenhaw to treat appellant as a hostile witness due to surprise. Prior to the trial, appellant had gone over a statement, which he had given to a detective, with Mrs. Greenhaw, affirming the truthfulness and correctness of it. In pre-trial interviews, appellant implicated Will Travis in a forgery; however, at trial, appellant testified that Travis was not involved in the forgery at all. Appellant testified, in response to Mrs. Greenhaw's questions, that he had lied in his prior statement and had lied in pre-trial interviews.
Mrs. Greenhaw identified a statement by appellant, given to a Captain Bobo, as the one which appellant repudiated at the Travis trial.
Neal Clingan testified that he was employed by the Dallas County Circuit Court as a Court Reporter. Clingan identified a transcription of appellant's testimony at the Travis forgery trial and testified that he reported and transcribed the testimony in that case. Clingan certified the transcription as true and correct and it was introduced into evidence without objection. Clingan then read appellant's previous testimony to the jury. In that testimony, appellant repudiated every material element of his statement to Captain Bobo, which has been previously set out.
Will Travis, Jr., testified that he was tried for forgery in August of 1977, and that appellant was a witness in the case. Travis further testified that he had entered a guilty plea to the forgery charge.
William M. Bobo testified that he was Captain of Detectives for the Selma Police Department. Bobo identified a waiver of rights form and a statement, both signed by appellant on December 2, 1976. The statement is set out above, following the indictment. These two documents were placed in evidence over appellant's objection.
Bobo further testified that appellant made this statement after his arrest at Clay's Casino for forgery. Appellant's and Travis's fingerprints were on the check which was taken by police at the Casino. Bobo then read the statement to the jury.
On cross-examination, Bobo testified that, prior to giving the above mentioned statement, appellant told him that Travis had nothing to do with the forgery. Appellant implicated Travis after he spoke with his uncle.
George Jeffcoat testified that he was the State Parole and Probation Supervisor in Dallas County and that he was appellant's supervisor in August, 1977, on a probationary sentence involving forgery. On August 10, 1977, Jeffcoat had a conversation with appellant at the Dallas County Jail.
On voir dire examination, Jeffcoat testified that he had issued an authorization of arrest for appellant because of probation violation. From the record
Jeffcoat further testified that he did not advise appellant of his Miranda rights at any time prior to obtaining this statement. Nor did appellant have an attorney present until after this...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Glenn v. State, 6 Div. 282
...including incriminating statements, introduced at trial will preclude this Court from reviewing the question on appeal. Murry v. State, Ala.Cr.App., 367 So.2d 985 (1978), cert. denied, Ala., 367 So.2d 989 (1979); Wright v. State, Ala.Cr.App., 343 So.2d 795, cert. denied, Ala., 343 So.2d 801......
-
Dill v. State
...falsity of the defendant's testimony by more than one witness and strong corroboration from surrounding circumstances. Murry v. State, 367 So.2d 985 (Ala.Cr.App.1978). A witness to the corpus delecti of perjury is one "who has independent knowledge of the facts to which the defendant has sw......
-
Ikner v. State
...be false or it is not the subject of legal perjury. Winchester v. State, 20 Ala.App. 431, 102 So. 595 [ (1925) ]." Murry v. State, 367 So.2d 985, 989 (Ala.Cr.App.1978), cert. denied, 367 So.2d 989 "A statement is 'material,' regardless of the admissibility of the statement under the rules o......
-
Gunn v. State, 6
...Discussion of this issue is pretermitted for failure to preserve the question for review by timely objection at trial. Murry v. State, Ala.Cr.App., 367 So.2d 985 (1978), cert. denied, Ala., 367 So.2d 989 (1979); Hargrove v. State, Ala.Cr.App., 344 So.2d 823, cert. denied, Ala., 344 So.2d 82......