State v. Gibson, 579.

Citation5 S.E.2d 717
Decision Date29 November 1939
Docket NumberNo. 579.,579.
PartiesSTATE. v. GIBSON.
CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of North Carolina

5 S.E.2d 717

STATE.
v.
GIBSON.

No. 579.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

Nov. 29, 1939.


[5 S.E.2d 717]

Appeal from Superior Court, New Hanover County; Henry L. Stevens, Judge.

Simon Gibson, alias Coochie Gibson, was convicted of rape, and he appeals.

Reversed, and new trial awarded.

Criminal prosecution tried upon indictment charging the defendant with rape.

Verdict: Guilty of rape as charged in the bill of indictment.

Judgment: Death by asphyxiation.

The defendant appeals, assigning errors.

Harry McMullan, Atty. Gen., and T. W. Bruton and George B. Patton, Asst. Attys. Gen., for the State.

William L. Farmer and Addison Hewlett, Jr., both of Wilmington, for defendant.

STACY, Chief Justice.

The record discloses that the crime of which the defendant stands charged, and has been convicted, occurred on the night of July 23, 1939, at the home of the prosecuting witness in the City of Wilmington. About a month later the defendant was arrested and taken before the prosecuting witness. "She did not absolutely identify this boy as being the man * * * at that time. * * * She looked at him, and studied him and says 'I don't think it is him.'" The defendant was put in jail. On August 24 he made a confession in the presence of several officers, including the Mayor of the City of Wilmington, and others, which, upon the voir dire, was found to be involuntary. The inducement, according to the defendant's contention, was, that the officers said to him after his arrest, "We have plenty on you", and suggested or made offers "that it was best to tell about everything * * * let the sentences run concurrently, and that it would be lighter on him." State v. Stevenson, 212 N.C. 648, 194 S.E. 81; State v. Harrison, 115 N.C. 706, 20 S.E. 175. This alleged confession was made in the office of the Mayor.

On the trial of the cause, the prosecuting witness was positive in her identification of the defendant as her assailant.

The Mayor was called as a witness for the State. He was allowed to testify, over objection, that the defendant had "repeated his confession" to him that morning just before the opening of court while the defendant was in the prisoner's box. The witness testified: "He rambled about and practically denied it. * * * I said you are guilty, aren't you, and he said, 'Yes Sir', but he said, 'There are two men in that paper.'" The jury was admonished not to consider any reference to the paper, the prior confession. The witness continued: "He did not come right out and say

[5...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT