State v. Stevenson

• Decision Date: 15 December 1937
• Docket Number: No. 577.,577.
• Citation: 212 N.C. 648,194 S.E. 81
• Court: North Carolina Supreme Court
• Parties: STATE. v. STEVENSON.

194 S.E. 81

212 N.C. 648

STATE.

v.STEVENSON.

No. 577.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

Dec. 15, 1937.

Appeal from Superior Court, Columbus County; J. Paul Frizzelle, Judge.

George Stevenson was convicted of first-degree burglary, and he appeals.

New trial granted.

Criminal prosecution tried upon indictment charging defendant with burglary in the first degree. C.S. § 4232.

The defendant pleaded not guilty.

In the course of the trial below and during the examination of State's witness W. H. Bullard, an officer, the Solicitor for the State proposed to offer in evidence a written statement, dated "8/3/37, " purporting to be signed by and a confession of the defendant, in which, among other things, it is stated: " * * * I went into the house * * *. This is a true and voluntary statement made of my own free will and accord." Counsel for defendant objected, and in the absence of the jury, stated to the court that the defendant had said to him that his sole purpose in signing the confession was that he was in fear of being lynched, and he wanted to get back; that he was drunk the night of the alleged crime and that he does not know what happened. Counsel further stated to the court that he would like to examine the defendant; that he was willing to have him sworn and examined in the absence of the jury, solely for that purpose. The defendant was not examined. But the witness Bullard was examined with the view of eliciting the facts as to the circumstances under which the statement was made. The witness stated that Corporal Pridgen wrote the statement just as defendant had "told it, " and that the "statement was free, voluntary and of his own free will and accord." Continuing, the witness said: "Corporal Pridgen and me brought him back up in the front room of the jail. No one else was there except we three. I do not think he was asked whether or not he would sign the confession' until we got him in and told him to come on with the truth about it. * * * I came back over here the next morning and went up in the jail, and he began to tell me something else, and I told him 'There is no use you beginning to tell a lie to me this morning, I have already got too much evidence to convict you. We are going to take you down there.' I took him up to Dr. Johnson's with the wound in his arm. We got out there and George said, Well, I want to tell the truth about it.' Then, of course, just voluntarily then, he told what he has told. We did have him outof jail then." The Court ruled that the alleged confession was freely and voluntarily made and, therefore, admissible. "To the ruling of the court, without examination of the defendant, as requested and urged by defendant's counsel, the defendant excepted." The statement was introduced in evidence. Defendant excepted.

Verdict: Guilty of burglary in the first degree.

Judgment: Death by asphyxiation.

Dwight McEwen, of Whiteville, for appellant.

A. A. F. Seawell, Atty. Gen, and Harry McMullan, Asst. Atty. Gen, for the State.

WINBORNE, Justice.

We are of opinion that the alleged confession, having been made under the circumstances described by the officer, was involuntary and incompetent. The admission of it in evidence is error. State v. Anderson, 208 N.C. 771 at pages 777 and 783, 182 S.E. 643, 650; State v. Myers, 202 N. C 351, 162 S.E. 764; State v. Livingston, 202 N.C. 809, 164 S.E. 337; State v. Grier, 203 N.C. 586, 166 S.E. 595; State v....