State v. Gregory
| Decision Date | 30 June 1858 |
| Court | North Carolina Supreme Court |
| Parties | STATE v. JOHN GREGORY. |
Where confessions, which had been illegally elicited from one accused of a homicide, were pronounced to him, by the person obtaining them, to be illegal and wrongfully extracted, and he was informed that such confessions could not be used against him, and he was fully cautioned against making further confessions, it was Held that voluntary confessions, subsequently made by the prisoner, were admissible.
Where evidence was given to the Court, in presence of the jury, of confessions illegally obtained, and afterwards the Judge rehearsed the evidence thus given, for the purpose of cautioning them against permitting it to have any effect upon their minds, except to weaken the force of voluntary confessions subsequently made, it was Held not be error.
INDICTMENT for MURDER, tried before ELLIS, J., at the last Spring Term of Halifax Superior Court.
Evidence was offered by the State, of confessions made by the prisoner to one Faucette, which was objected to by the prisoner's counsel, upon the ground, that Mr. Parker, the examining magistrate, had shortly before that, induced the prisoner to confess, by holding out hopes of his being favored, if he would do so.
Parker was then introduced to the Court, to state what were the circumstances under which the confessions were made to him, and he stated that before he commenced officially to examine into the case upon the question of commitment, he told the prisoner, that it would be better for him to confess the homicide, and throw himself upon the mercy of the Governor for a pardon. The prisoner made no admissions then, but subsequently, on the examination, he did confess some material facts against himself. The magistrate becoming sensible of the impropriety of his course, went to the prisoner and told him that he had acted improperly in this respect; that his confessions were illegally obtained from him; that they, on that account, could not be used against him hereafter on his trial; but that if he, after that, made any further confessions, they would be evidence against him, and advised him not to make any more.
It was after this, that he made the confessions proposed to be proved by Faucette.
The Court held the evidence admissible. Defendant excepted.
The Court, in the instructions given to the jury, said in relation to the confessions made to Faucette, that “they were not, necessarily, to act upon them as true, but would weigh them as they would any other evidence, and it was for them to say whether they would believe them or not; in doing so, they ought to look to the circumstances under which they were made; the fact that he was tied at the time, and in charge of an officer; that questions were asked him; that hope of favor was held out to him by the examining magistrate, and though he had been subsequently warned not to confess, or it would be given in evidence against him, yet, it was proper for the jury to consider how far his mind may still have been operated upon by those promises.”
The prisoner's counsel...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Moore
... ... the length of time intervening or from other facts in ... evidence, the prior influence had been removed at the time of ... the subsequent confession. State v. Lowry, 170 N.C ... 730, 87 S.E. 62; State v. Fisher, 51 N.C. 478; ... State v. Scates, 50 N.C. 420; State v ... Gregory, 50 N.C. 315; 16 C.J., 722 ... In this ... jurisdiction, the competency of a confession is a preliminary ... question for the trial court, State v. Andrew, 61 ... N.C. 205, to be determined in the manner pointed out in ... State v. Whitener, 191 N.C. 659, 132 S.E. 603. The ... ...
-
State v. Moore
...the subsequent confession. State v. Lowry, 170 N.C. 730, 87 S.E. 62; State v. Fisher, 51 N.C. 478; State v. Scates, 50 N.C. 420; State v. Gregory, 50 N.C. 315; 16 C.J., 722. In this jurisdiction, the competency of a confession is a preliminary question for the trial court, State v. Andrew, ......
-
State v. Hamer
...supra; State v. Fox, supra; State v. Lowry, 170 N.C. 730, 87 S.E. 62; State v. Fisher, 51 N.C. 478; State v. Scates, 50 N.C. 420; State v. Gregory, 50 N.C. 315. When the case on appeal is read in the light of these rules, it is manifest that the trial judge did not err in admitting the seco......
-
State v. Edwards
...and (2) that his previous confession, made under improper inducement, cannot be used against him.' Citing many cases including: State v. Gregory, 50 N.C. 315; State v. Scates, 50 N.C. 420; People v. Jones, 24 Cal.2d 601, 150 P.2d 801; Williams v. United States, 328 F.2d 669 (5th Cir. The pr......