State v. Paul Zaccario

Decision Date06 October 1925
Docket Number(No. 5341)
Citation100 W.Va. 36
PartiesState v. Paul Zaccario
CourtWest Virginia Supreme Court

1. Criminal Law Conditions to Render Admissible Evidence of Extrajudicial Confession to One in Authority or Some Person Acting Under Apparent Sanction of Those in Authority Stated.

To render admissible evidence of an extra-judicial confession by an accused to one in authority, or some person acting under the apparent sanction of those in authority, it must appear that the confession was freely and voluntarily made and without previous inducements of a temporal or worldly character in the nature of threats or intimidation, or some promise or benefit held out to the accused by which he may expect mitigation of punishment or to escape from the consequence of his crime.

(Criminal Law, 16 C. J. §§ 1468, 1509).

(Note: Parenthetical references by Editors, C. J. Cyc. Not part of syllabi.)

Error to Circuit Court, Monongalia County. Paul Zaccario was convicted of violation of the prohibition laws, and he brings error.

Reversed and remanded.

Eugene H. Long, for plaintiff in error. Howard B. Lee, Attorney General, and R. A. Blessing, Assistant Attorney General, for the State.

Litz, Judge:

An indictment in two counts was returned against the defendant, charging him (1) with owning, operating, maintaining, possessing and having an interest in a moonshine still; and (2) with aiding and abetting in the operation thereof. To the judgment of the Circuit Court, upon a verdict of conviction "as charged in the indictment", imposing a fine of $300 and sentence of two and a half years in the penitentiary, he prosecutes this writ, Having a warrant for the search of the dwelling house and premises of the defendant, J. S. Watson, a constable, accompanied by two other persons, went to the home of defendant at 10:30 or 11:00 o'clock at night, August 19, 1924. In the yard, "about forty-eight steps from the house", they found seventeen pints of moonshine liquor. There was also discovered next morning, one-fourth mile from the residence, two stills and three hundred gallons of mash.

In addition to these facts, the prosecution introduced, over the objection of defendant, evidence of an alleged confession by him after his arrest to the jailor and arresting officer, without showing that it had been freely and voluntarily made. The defendant denied the confession and stated, without contradiction, he was assaulted by the jailor for refusing to...

To continue reading

Request your trial
20 cases
  • State v. Plantz
    • United States
    • West Virginia Supreme Court
    • April 27, 1971
    ...108 W.Va. 681, 152 S.E. 633; State v. Brady, 104 W.Va. 523, 140 S.E. 546; State v. Richards, 101 W.Va. 136, 132 S.E. 375; State v. Zaccario, 100 W.Va. 36, 129 S.E. 763; State Goldizen, 93 W.Va. 328, 116 S.E. 687; State v. Morgan, 35 W.Va. 260, 13 S.E. After the trial court determines that a......
  • State v. Stevenson
    • United States
    • West Virginia Supreme Court
    • October 22, 1962
    ...the circumstances, he is not entitled to a new trial.' Counsel for the defendant rely upon the decisions of this Court in State v. Zaccario, 100 W.Va. 36, 129 S.E. 763; State v. Brady, 104 W.Va. 523, 140 S.E. 546; and State v. Mayle, 108 W.Va. 681, 152 S.E. 633. The single syllabus point in......
  • State v. Farley
    • United States
    • West Virginia Supreme Court
    • November 18, 1994
    ...to its admissibility that the voluntariness of a confession is established by a preponderance of the evidence. State v. Zaccario, 100 W.Va. 36, 129 S.E. 763 (1925). A mere prima facie showing is insufficient. State v. Starr, 158 W.Va. 905, 216 S.E.2d 242 (1975). Once that decision is made, ......
  • State v. Vance
    • United States
    • West Virginia Supreme Court
    • March 6, 1962
    ...523, 140 S.E. 546. See also State v. Mayle, 108 W.Va. 681, 152 S.E. 633; State v. Richards, 101 W.Va. 136, 132 S.E. 375; State v. Zaccario, 100 W.Va. 36, 129 S.E. 763; State v. Goldizen, 93 W.Va. 328, 116 S.E. 687. The evidence was sufficient to show to the satisfaction of the court that th......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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