Slayton v. State

• Decision Date: 11 June 1936
• Docket Number: 6 Div. 963
• Citation: 173 So. 642,234 Ala. 1
• Parties: SLAYTON v. STATE.
• Court: Alabama Supreme Court

173 So. 642

234 Ala. 1

SLAYTON v. STATE.

6 Div. 963

Supreme Court of Alabama

June 11, 1936

Rehearing Denied Oct. 8, 1936

Certiorari to Court of Appeals.

Petition of the State of Alabama, by and through its Attorney General for certiorari to the Court of Appeals to review and revise the judgment and decision of that court in Slayton v State, 173 So. 632.

Writ granted; reversed and remanded.

Whether defendant accused of assault with intent to murder his wife made hasty 480-mile trip to another state to see woman with whom he had had liaison, after he was under suspicion and investigation for crime, because he was prompted by consciousness of guilt and desire to suppress testimony favorable to state, or because of other motives, held for jury.

The defendant, Slayton, was convicted under an indictment charging assault with intent to murder, and he appealed to the Court of Appeals. The opinion of that court, brought under review by this proceeding, discloses the following:

While the defendant and his wife lay in bed in an upper room of their home, in the nighttime, a negro by the name of Joe Percy Bragg entered the house through a rear screen door proceeded up the stairs to a hallway and through a doorway entering the room where defendant and his wife were sleeping, and fired two shots from a pistol, one shot striking defendant's wife in the head near the eye and the other in her breast. The woman made an outcry, and defendant jumped up and gave an alarm.

"The negro Bragg was arrested and placed in jail. He knew both defendant and his wife and was familiar with the premises, having worked around the house doing odd jobs both for defendant and his wife. When Bragg was first arrested he made a confession *** in which he stated that he did not intend to hurt Mrs. Slayton, *** that he went out there to kill Mr. Slayton *** because he hated him. Afterwards Bragg made another statement *** that defendant had instigated the crime in order to get rid of his wife, because she had been 'giving me the devil about running around.' " Bragg further stated that Slayton threatened him if he did not kill his wife and promised, if he did do it, to take him to New Mexico; that Slayton arranged the details of the crime, and made certain payments of money to Bragg.

"The story told by Bragg *** is the statement of an acknowledged accomplice, which under our statute, *** must be corroborated by other evidence tending to connect the defendant with the commission of the offense. ***"

It further appears from the opinion that the state, for corroboration of the testimony of Bragg, the accomplice, relied upon the fact that "defendant on Wednesday night, after his wife was shot by the negro, Bragg, at 1:00 A.M. Saturday morning, went to Arkansas to see the Teachworth girl, where he had a conversation with her for thirty minutes about 2:30 A.M. Thursday in which conversation the Teachworth girl asked defendant to bring her back to Birmingham and he refused, saying: 'No, he didn't want me to come back here, it was a disgrace to come back here, it would just cause embarrassment.' And further: 'He did not tell me what to tell them (the police) in case they did come out there. He said they might come out there and if I didn't want to come back not to come back. He said to tell them nothing. Of course, I didn't know anything to tell.' "

It further appears from the opinion that "Billie Teachworth testified that at the time appellant called upon her as aforesaid she had already heard of his wife's having been shot. She said he told her at that time and place, and under those circumstances," that he did not want her to come back to Birmingham.

The following observation is made in the opinion: "As preliminary to the consideration of the testimony of an accomplice, the jury is required to believe or find beyond a reasonable doubt that the evidence of corroboration is true, and that it tends to connect defendant with the commission of the crime charged. After reaching such conclusion beyond a reasonable doubt, they may then go further and consider the whole testimony and convict if they find the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Cobb v. State, 20 Ala.App. 3, 100 So. 463, certiorari denied 211 Ala. 320, 100 So. 466."

The holding of the Court of Appeals is, in effect, that assuming the liaison between defendant and the Teachworth girl furnished evidence from which motive on the part of defendant might be inferred, motive alone is not sufficient corroboration to warrant a conviction; and that, eliminating the evidence as to motive and the testimony of Bragg, no evidence is found tending to connect defendant with the instigation of the crime charged.

A.A. Carmichael, Atty. Gen., and Geo. Lewis Bailes, Sol., and Robt. G. Tate, Asst. Sol., both of Birmingham, for the State.

Horace C. Wilkinson, of Birmingham, opposed.

BROWN Justice.

Where the state relies on the testimony of an accomplice, in the main, to support an indictment and conviction for a felony the statute, section 5635, Code 1923, prohibits a conviction unless the testimony of the...