State v. Munson

• Decision Date: 09 November 1893
• Citation: 34 P. 932,7 Wash. 239
• Parties: STATE v. MUNSON.
• Court: Washington Supreme Court

34 P. 932

7 Wash. 239

STATE v. MUNSON.

Supreme Court of Washington

November 9, 1893

Appeal from superior court, Thurston county; M. J. Gordon, Judge.

Fred Munson was convicted of burglary, and appeals. Affirmed.

Skillman & Agnew and J. R. Mitchell, for appellant.

Milo A Root, for the State.

ANDERS J.

The defendant was tried and convicted of the crime of burglary alleged in the information to have been committed on the night of the 15th day of February, 1893, by feloniously and burglariously breaking and entering the store of one M O'Connor, in the city of Olympia, county of Thurston, and state of Washington, with intent then and there feloniously to take, steal, and carry away certain money, the property of said O'Connor, and then being in said store. From the judgment entered on the verdict of the jury the defendant appeals, and asks a reversal thereof on account of errors which he alleges the court committed on the trial.

At the trial the court permitted certain inculpatory declarations made by the defendant to the officers having him in custody after his arrest for the offense with which he was charged, and for which he was subsequently tried. The point made by the learned counsel for appellant is that these declarations were in the nature of confessions, and were made under the influence of fear produced by threats, and were therefore admitted in evidence in violation of the provisions of Code Proc. § 1308. ^[1] But we think the position of counsel is not tenable for the reasons (1) that no direct confession of guilt was made by the defendant; and (2) that the court was clearly justified, by the evidence before it, in concluding that no threats were made, and that what the defendant then said was not caused by duress or fear, but were his own free and voluntary declarations. Nor do we think the defendant was at all prejudiced by the court permitting the county attorney to ask, and the witnesses to answer, the question, "Did you make any threats to him?" Even conceding, as claimed on behalf of the appellant, that the question was leading, and called for the expression of an opinion merely on the part of the witnesses so interrogated, yet, as all that was done or said to the appellant, or by him, was subsequently stated in detail, no injury could possibly have resulted to the appellant by reason of the ruling of the court.

It is contended that the corpus delicti was not proven; in other words, that the crime of burglary was not shown to have been committed. But in our judgment there was ample proof of the commission of the crime charged. The facts, as disclosed by the evidence, were briefly these: M. O'Connor owned a store in Olympia. In that store he had a safe, in which there were about eighty dollars when he left the store on the evening in question, consisting of gold and silver coin, and currency or "greenbacks;" the latter being a ten, a five, and a one dollar bill. He and the two young ladies who were his clerks left the store at about 8 o'clock in the evening, and neither of them returned until the next morning between 7 and 8 o'clock. No one was there when O'Connor left, and the doors were locked and the windows closed when they went away. There was no way...