State v. Burks
| Decision Date | 04 November 1940 |
| Docket Number | 35903. |
| Citation | 196 La. 374,199 So. 220 |
| Court | Louisiana Supreme Court |
| Parties | STATE v. BURKS. |
Rehearing Denied Dec. 3, 1940.
Appeal from Fourteenth Judicial District Court, Parish of Calcasieu Mark C. Pickrel, Judge.
Finnon Burks was convicted for murder, and he appeals.
Affirmed.
Eugene Stanley, Atty. Gen., Niels F. Hertz, Asst Atty. Gen., and C. V. Pattison, Dist. Atty., Coleman D. Reed Asst. Dist. Atty., and John H. Martin, Asst. Dist. Atty., all of Lake Charles, for the State, plaintiff and appellee.
J. A. Williams, of Lake Charles, for defendant appellant.
The defendant, Finnon Burks, was jointly indicted with Annie Beatrice Henry for the murder of J. P. Calloway but was tried separately, his co-principal having been granted a severance, and from his conviction and sentence to hang he prosecutes this appeal.
It appears that Burks and Mrs. Henry, in order to carry out a preconceived plan to rob a bank, held up the deceased, with whom they had obtained a ride while hitchhiking, and that, after he had been robbed of his worldly goods and his car-his clothing having been removed in order to delay pursuit in the event his body was found-he was shot while on his knees begging for his life. According to the version of the defendant, who made a complete and detailed confession of the crime both at the time of his arrest, to the sheriff in the presence of three witnesses, and while testifying in his own behalf during the trial, the actual shooting was done by his co-principal, Mrs. Henry. He did not ask for an acquittal but sought to have a qualified verdict of guilty as charged without capital punishment rendered by the jury.
During the course of the trial five bills of exception were reserved by the defendant, but he relies mainly for the reversal of his conviction and sentence upon the one dealing with a portion of the closing argument of the assistant district attorney, who, with a copy of the statute in his hand, said: ‘ I am going to ask the Judge to charge you about the law here about pardon and commutation of sentence and that the average term served by prisoners sentenced to life imprisonment is not more than ten years.’ This, he contends, constitutes reversible error unless we overrule the decision in the case of State v. Johnson, 151 La. 625, 92 So. 139.
In every capital case, under the express provisions of Article 409 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and Section 1000 of the Revised Statutes, the jury have the right to qualify their verdict by bringing in a verdict of guilty ‘ without capital punishment,’ and the district judge is required to so instruct them.
It was held in the case of State v. Satcher, 124 La. 1015, 50 So. 835, 838, that it was not reversible error for the trial judge to charge the jury in a capital case upon the amount of punishment attached to each verdict they might render. In that case ‘ * * * the judge, after correctly instructing them as to the punishment attached to murder, murder without capital punishment, and manslaughter, added, further, ‘ under the law of commutation for good time service, under a verdict of ‘ guilty, without capital punishment,’ the term of imprisonment is claimed by some, and may be the rule, would amount to a period of fifteen years.'* * *' This court, disposing of defendant's bill of exception reserved on this point, said: ‘ The meaning of the explanation given by the judge plainly was that, whilst the sentence upon a verdict of guilty of murder without capital punishment would be imprisonment at hard labor for life, the party so sentenced might, by good behavior, have his term of imprisonment shortened to 15 years; and we are unable to discover in what way the defendants were thereby prejudiced, the fact being, that under the last proviso of Act No. 160 of 1902 * * *, the term of imprisonment may be made even less than 15 years.’
In the Johnson case [151 La. 625, 92 So. 142] this court held it to be reversible error for the district attorney in his closing argument to the jury to state-over defendant's objection and especially when the record did not show ‘ * * * that the subject of the remarks was referred to in the general...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Blackwell
...the State's right to inform the jury about pardons and paroles available to the defendant in the event of his conviction in State v. Burks, 196 La. 374, 199 So. 220. Mr. Justice Dixon further 'A large part of the value of the jury system is that a jury might refuse to enforce an oppressive ......
-
State v. Rideau
...to be informed that a voluntary confession might or will be used against him. State v. McGuire, 146 La. 49, 83 So. 374; State v. Burks, 196 La. 374, 199 So. 220; State v. Byrd, 214 La. 713, 38 So.2d 395; State v. Alleman, 218 La. 821, 51 So.2d The fact that the defendant was handcuffed at t......
-
State v. Sheffield
...to be informed that a voluntary confession might or will be used against him. State v. McGuire, 146 La. 49, 83 So. 374; State v. Burks, 196 La. 374, 199 So. 220; State v. Byrd, 214 La. 713, 38 So.2d 395; State v. Alleman, 218 La. 821, 51 So.2d We find no merit in Bills of Exception Nos. 7 a......
-
State v. Henry
... ... the course of the trial, to which objections were [200 La ... 879] timely made and bills of exceptions reserved ... It appears ... that in order to carry out a preconceived plan to rob a bank ... in Arkansas, Mrs. Henry and her accomplice, Finnon Burks, ... held up the deceased, with whom they had secured a ride while ... hitchhiking, and robbed him, Mrs. Henry shooting him while he ... was on his knees begging for his life after she had caused ... him to remove his clothing and had ordered her accomplice to ... destroy the same in order ... ...