State v. Dills
| Decision Date | 26 June 1935 |
| Docket Number | No. 632.,632. |
| Citation | 180 S.E. 571,208 N. C. 313 |
| Parties | STATE. v. DILLS et al. |
| Court | North Carolina Supreme Court |
Appeal from Superior Court, Guilford County; Alley, Judge.
Ralph Dills and another were convicted of murder, and they appeal.
New trial.
The appellants Ralph Dills and Luther E. Osborne were tried jointly with Paul Sams, Robert Smith, and Reuben Varner, upon a bill of indictment charging them with the murder of one William Davis. Sams and Smith were acquitted. Warner was convicted of second-degree murder and sentenced to imprisonment, and Dills and Osborne were convicted of first-degree murder, and from judgment of death appealed to the Supreme Court, assigning errors.
J. A. Myatt, of High Point, for appellant Ralph Dills.
Gold, McAnally & Gold, of High Point, for appellant Luther E. Osborne.
A. A. F. Seawell, Atty. Gen., and John W. Aiken, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
Since they are decisive of this appeal, it becomes necessary for us to discuss only those assignments of error which assail the admission of certain evidence offered by the state.
While all five of the defendants named in the bill were under arrest, two of them, Sams and Smith, made separate voluntary affidavits which exculpated the affiants and inculpated the appellants. The appellant Osborne, while under arrest, was taken by the high sheriff of Guilford county from his cell into a private room adjoining the city jail and was then and there in the presence of the sheriff, his deputies, and others, compelled to hear read the affidavit of Sams, and to hear Sams say it was correct. Thesheriff and others were permitted, over objections and exceptions duly taken, to testify that under these circumstances the defendant Osborne "said nothing." Substantially the same procedure was followed as to the appellant Osborne with reference to the affidavit of the codefendant Smith. Also substantially the same procedure was followed as to the appellant Dills with reference to both affidavits and both affiants. Neither of the affiants, Sams or Smith, was introduced as a witness at the trial of the cause.
The rule, generally followed, is, that statements made to or in the presence and hearing of a person, accusing him of the commission of or complicity in a crime, are, when not denied, admissible in evidence against him as warranting an inference of the truth of such statements. 1 R. C. L. 479. However, the occasion must be such as to call for a reply or denial. "It is not sufficient that the statement was made in the presence of the defendant against whom it is sought to be used, even though he remained silent; but it is further necessary that the circumstances should have been such as to call for a denial on his part, and to afford him an opportunity to make it." 16 C. J. 659; State v. Wilson, 205 N. C. 376, 171 S. E. 338.
We hold that the present occasions were not such as to call for a reply from the appellants. They had already been arrested and placed in jail, and had denied to the officers that they were present at the scene of the crime, and nothing more could be accomplished, or at least they might readily have thought...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Garcia
...making the accusatory statement. People v. Collins, 234 N.Y. 355, 364--5, 137 N.E. 753, 757 (Ct.App.1922), and State v. Dills, 208 N.C. 313, 180 S.E. 571 (Sup.Ct.1935), both alternative holdings; Commonwealth v. Mazarella, 279 Pa. 465, 124 A. 163 (Sup.Ct.1924) (apparently ignored by the Pen......
-
State v. Castor
...or lack of voluntariness renders the admission incompetent.' State v. Guffey, Supra, at 324, 134 S.E.2d at 621. In State v. Dills, 208 N.C. 313, 180 S.E. 571 (1935), the appellants, when under arrest upon a charge of murder, were forced by officers to hear read affidavits of codefendants wh......
-
State v. Dills, 652.
...Pless, Judge. Ralph Dills and Luther E. Osborne were convicted of robbery with firearms, and they appeal. No error. See, also, 208 N.C. 313, 180 S.E. 571. This is a case in which the defendants, Ralph Dills and Luther E. Osborne, were tried in the superior court of Guilford county at the De......
-
State v. Dills
...20, 1936 Ralph Dills and Luther E. Osborne were convicted of robbery with firearms, and they appeal. No error. See, also, 208 N.C. 313, 180 S.E. 571. This a case in which the defendants, Ralph Dills and Luther E. Osborne, were tried in the superior court of Guilford county at the December c......