State v. Brooks

• Decision Date: 12 December 1945
• Docket Number: 582
• Citation: 36 S.E.2d 238,225 N.C. 662
• Parties: STATE v. BROOKS.
• Court: North Carolina Supreme Court

36 S.E.2d 238

225 N.C. 662

STATE v. BROOKS.

No. 582

Supreme Court of North Carolina

December 12, 1945

The defendant, a young negro fourteen or fifteen years of age was convicted under a bill of indictment charging him, in two counts, of rape upon the person of Mrs. G. V. Parker and of burglary in breaking and entering the dwelling house then occupied by her, in the nighttime, with the intent to commit this felony.

Many of the details are unprintable, but the evidence necessary to an understanding of the decision upon the appeal may be summarized as follows:

The Parkers, husband and wife, and a daughter seven years old lived as the sole occupants of a five-room house in Wilmington. The house had a living room, two bedrooms adjoining room, kitchen and bath. The husband was away on the night of the occurrence, working at the shipyard, and Mrs Parker and young child were alone in the house. She had been sewing, and a little after midnight cut off the radio and went to bed. She was eight months gone in pregnancy, was lying in bed in some discomfort and unable to sleep, and alert to noises. She heard a key turn in the lock of the front door, which she had locked before retiring. Thinking it was her husband who had returned because of sickness, or some other reason, she did not get up, but lay listening. She heard the sound of the French doors between the living room and dining room being opened, and called 'Who is that?' and someone said, 'It is me.' Mrs. Parker said, 'Who is me?' and got the reply 'Jake,' and the person, whom she later identified as this defendant, pushed the bedroom door open, and with violence and threats to kill Mrs. Parker and her little girl who was in the room, overcame her resistance and accomplished the act as far as necessary to complete the crime. However, he became frightened at the cries of the little girl and left without fully completing the sexual act.

Mrs. Parker immediately called her neighbors from her window, called up her husband, who was working at the shipyard, and when he came, the police were called. Mrs. Parker detailed the circumstances to the policeman, Murray, minutely describing the defendant. Murray testified in corroboration of the witness, stating that she had described the clothing of her assailant, the physical appearance of his face and eyes and other characteristics, and said she was satisfied that she could recognize his eyes. She gave a detailed statement of what occurred that night; said that the boy was dressed in a pair of dark trousers, a dirty jacket, similar to a soldier's jacket, and had on a toboggan, giving other details corresponding with her testimony on the trial.

The occurrence was after midnight, and on that same morning Murray took Mrs. Parker through the colored section of the city to see whether the assailant could be found and identified. Finally, the defendant was seen walking along the sidewalk, and Mrs. Parker screamed, 'There he is,' becoming much agitated and hysterical. On account of Mrs. Parker's condition, Murray did not want to bring Mrs. Parker nearer to the boy, but called other officers who followed and took him in charge, and he was carried to the office of Superintendent Fales for examination. He there confessed to the crime, going over in detail all the circumstances, and stating that he was frightened away by the crying of the little girl.

Upon trial of the case the voluntariness of this confession was challenged, and before admitting it in evidence, the jury was sent out and the question of its voluntariness was taken up by the court and evidence heard. On this inquiry the evidence was substantially as follows:

The witness Murray testified that prior to the confession neither he nor any person in his presence made any threat on or offered defendant any reward or leniency in the event he would make a statement, and that there was nothing done, of any nature, to force him to make it. That while Mr. Fales was beginning the questioning witness was outside, but was inside when the confession was made.

H. E. Fales, Superintendent of New Hanover County Bureau of Investigation, in whose office the confession was made, testified that 'he did not offer the defendant any reward or hope of reward, or promise him any leniency for telling the truth about the matter; and that no one in his presence forced the defendant to make any statement. ' He further testified:

'I talked with the defendant about the crime. I told him he didn't have to say anything. I asked him how old he was, what school he went to, did he go to Sunday School, and if he had done the crime. He didn't know anything about it at first, and then I showed him the key. I searched him and found the key. I found the key in his watch pocket. It was a regular house key. After I found the key, I talked on a little bit and I said, 'Did you unlock the door with this key' and he said, 'No, it was not locked,' and then he told me this story. He did admit he turned off the light, and I told him there were fingerprints, but I did not tell him they were his fingerprints. I told him this for the psychological effect. He did not come through with anything until I found the key. I asked him if he would go out with us and point out the alleged scene of the crime, and he said he would. He directed us to the proper street and up to this house, and when we got to the corner I said, 'Where is the house?' and he said, 'Right over there,' and he went to the house and I said, 'Just what did you do?' and he showed us, and he went up to the front porch and said the door was not locked, and how he went through the French doors, and then he went in the bedroom and showed us where the woman and the girl were lying on the bed. Frankly, I don't remember whether the statement was signed before we went or after we came back.'

The defendant testified substantially as follows:

'There were no officers at the exact time I came in there, but later Mr. Fales and Mr. Wolfe and Mr. Murray came in and two more policemen, and those other policemen were sitting there talking to me, and he told me he had my fingerprints and if I would come on and tell the truth it would be easier.'

He testified that he had a key on him which Mr. Fales found and that Mr. Fales asked him about it; that he told Mr. Fales that his father kept tools and things on a shelf, and he got it from there. Mr. Fales suggested that he go down there and give a demonstration--said 'did I want to go down there and show them the way to the house and everything'; that he was not told he didn't have to go; that after Mr. Fales told him he had his fingerprints, he thought he had to confess the crime.

'Q. Did he say anything about making it easier on you if you went through it? A. When I first came to the police station they said they had my fingerprints, and if I would tell the truth it would be a whole lot...