State v. Newsome

• Citation: 143 S.E. 187,195 N.C. 552
• Decision Date: 09 May 1928
• Docket Number: 74.
• Parties: STATE v. NEWSOME.
• Court: United States State Supreme Court of North Carolina

143 S.E. 187

195 N.C. 552

STATE v. NEWSOME.

No. 74.

Supreme Court of North Carolina

May 9, 1928

Appeal from Superior Court, Wayne County; Grady, Judge.

Larry Newsome was convicted of first degree murder and he appeals. New trial ordered.

Indictment for murder. Verdict: Guilty of murder in the first degree.

From judgment on the verdict, that defendant suffer death as provided by statute, defendant appealed to the Supreme Court.

Clarkson J., dissenting.

Madrid B. Loftin, of Goldsboro, for appellant.

Dennis G. Brummitt, Atty. Gen., and Frank Nash, Asst. Atty. Gen for the State.

CONNOR J.

The lifeless body of Beulah Tedder was found by her father. Alex Tedder, between 6:30 and 7 o'clock p. m. on Thursday December 8, 1927, lying beside a path, 35 or 40 yards from his home, in Wayne county, N.C. The path beside which the body was found runs from the home of Cora Reid to the home of the father of the deceased. She was lying flat on her back, with her head turned to one side, and with one leg drawn up under her body. Her dress was thrown back towards her shoulders. Her throat was cut; there were also cuts on her cheeks, her arms, and her hands. The evidence tended to show that these cuts were made with a knife, at or near the place where the body was found, by some person who, at the time, was assaulting her with a knife, and that she was attempting to escape from her assailant. The county physician who examined the body the next day after it was found by her father, about 10 o'clock a. m., testified that from his examination he was convinced that the deceased had not been ravished. She was a strong, well-developed girl, about 14 years of age, weighing about 115 pounds. There was no evidence tending to show that the deceased had been ravished or that the homicide had been committed in the perpetration of a rape upon the deceased.

The deceased was the oldest child of her father's family. She had left his home that evening about 6 o'clock with Cora Reid, a neighbor, whose home was at a distance of about 2,200 feet from her father's home. She went with Cora Reid to her home, at her father's request, to get some home-made syrup for the family. After she and Cora Reid arrived at the home of the latter, the deceased remained there for about five minutes. She then left, with the syrup, going in the direction of her father's home, along a path near which, at a distance of about 1,000 feet from the home of deceased's father, was situate the home of defendant, Larry Newsome. There was evidence tending to show that defendant was at his home, when deceased and Cora Reid passed the same, going to the home of the latter, walking together along the path, and that defendant saw them as they passed. He knew that deceased would later return to her father's home, by this path, alone. There was evidence tending to show further that defendant waylaid the deceased as she was returning from the home of Cora Reid to the home of her father, about 6:30 o'clock, and that he killed her by cutting her throat with a knife.

There was also evidence tending to show that defendant met the deceased, as she was returning from the home of Cora Reid to her father's home, near defendant's home, and that he then and there assaulted her, with intent to commit rape upon her. This assault, made about 125 to 140 yards from the place at which the body of the deceased was found, was not successful. The deceased broke away from defendant, and ran toward her father's home. There was evidence tending to show that defendant pursued her with intent to commit rape upon her, and that he overtook her; that defendant killed her by cutting her throat with a knife, while attempting to perpetrate upon her the crime of rape.

There was evidence tending to show further that, when defendant failed in his attempt to commit rape upon the deceased, at the time of his first assault upon her, because of her successful resistance, he abandoned his purpose to rape her, and that deceased escaped and ran from him; that, as she was running toward the home of her father, she called to defendant, saying that she would tell her father of defendant's assault upon her, as soon as she arrived at his home; that defendant then pursued her a distance of 125 to 140 yards from the place where he first assaulted her, overtook her, and again assaulted her with a knife, with no intent to rape her, but with intent to prevent her from telling her father of the previous assault with intent to commit rape; that, while making this latter assault upon deceased, defendant cut her throat with a knife, thus causing her death.

No evidence was offered by defendant. On cross-examination of witnesses for the state, defendant's counsel, assigned by the court to defend him in this action, sought to show that defendant's mental condition is such that he is not capable of committing crime. These witnesses testified that, while in their opinion defendant is a man of low mentality, with the mind of a child of immature years, he had sufficient intelligence to know, and did know, right from wrong, and that he was capable of appreciating, and did appreciate the moral quality of his acts. The sheriff of Wayne county, on his cross-examination as a witness for the state, testified "that he had been with the prisoner right much, while riding backwards and forwards, between different places; that in his opinion there are lots of people who have more sense than the defendant, but that defendant has plenty of sense to know right from wrong, and that defendant, in his opinion, has the intelligence of the average negro, without any education." Dr. W. C. Linville, psychiatrist for the State Hospital at Goldsboro, testified for the state that he had examined the defendant, since his arraignment upon the indictment in this action, in order to form an opinion as to his mental condition, and that in his opinion, formed as the result of such examination defendant was at the time of the examination, and also on the day of the homicide, sane. This witness on his cross-examination by counsel for defendant testified that defendant should be classed as a high-grade moron; that a high-grade moron is one whose mental faculties are undeveloped. On his re-direct examination, the witness defined a moron as "a man without any education, a man with very poor training in life, and very poor ideas of law and order."

The only objections made by counsel for defendant to evidence offered by the state were directed to testimony of witnesses as to alleged confessions made to them by defendant, after his arrest, and while he was in the custody of the sheriff or his deputies. Two Two of these witnesses, J. R. Kornegay, and Carl Smith, were deputy sheriffs of Wayne county. The other witness was Dr. W. C. Linville, the psychiatrist, who examined the defendant for the purpose of qualifying himself to testify as to the mental condition of defendant at the time of the homicide. Each of these witnesses testified that the confession made to him, or in his presence, was voluntary on the part of defendant, and was made without promise or threat to defendant. The court overruled the objection's, and defendant, having duly excepted, upon his appeal to this court assigns the admission of testimony tending to show confessions by him as error.

With respect to the testimony of witnesses as to confessions of defendant, the court instructed the jury as follows:

"Right here I want to say, and I feel it is my duty to say it: A confession of a prisoner who is charged with crime cannot be offered in evidence and received by the court and considered by the jury unless such confession is absolutely free and voluntary on the part of the person making it. If a person charged with crime is offered any inducement to confess, if any promises are made to him, or if he is threatened by any person, and under such threats, or by any coercion exercised upon him, he makes any admission or confession, the humanity of the law of this state will not permit that confession to be received in evidence. So in reference to the statements testified to by Mr. John Kornegay as to what the defendant told him after he left the penitentiary, and while he was on his way to Goldsboro, I charge you not to consider any statement made to him, because, after giving to his evidence mature thought and consideration, I have decided that the promise that he made to the defendant while in the penitentiary that he would protect him, was there to protect him, was such a promise as would make any confession inadmissible in a court of justice. So, when you go to make up your verdict, I charge you not to consider anything that Mr. Kornegay said as to confession made to him, or anything Mr. Carl Smith said as to confessions made to Mr. Kornegay while he was on the way from Raleigh to Goldsboro. However, this does not apply to the testimony of Dr. Linville. This testimony on the part of Dr. Linville as to what the defendant said to him I consider competent evidence, and it is permissible for you to consider it when you go to make up your verdict."

If the testimony of the witnesses, Kornegay and Smith, deputy sheriffs of Wayne county, as to statements, in the nature of confessions, made by defendant to the witness Kornegay, in the presence of the witness Smith, was incompetent and inadmissible as evidence against the defendant, for that said statements were made by the defendant in reliance upon assurances of the deputy sheriff's that they would protect him while he was in their custody, and if it was therefore error to overrule defendant's objections to the admission of this testimony when same was offered by the state such error was rendered harmless by the withdrawal of the incompetent testimony from the...