State v. Throndson

• Decision Date: 22 December 1922
• Parties: STATE v. THRONDSON.
• Court: North Dakota Supreme Court

49 N.D. 348

191 N.W. 628

STATE

v.THRONDSON.

Supreme Court of North Dakota.

Dec. 22, 1922.

Syllabus by the Court.

Elmer Dezell was shot and killed by the defendant at the former's farm residence in Grand Forks county on the 28th day of December, 1919, and immediately following the shooting the defendant attempted suicide. On the evening of the same day on which the killing of Dezell occurred the defendant signed a written confession, and signed a second written confession on the 29th day of December, 1919, both of which admit the shooting of Dezell and set forth in detail the reasons and causes leading up to the shooting and the surrounding circumstances. Both of these statements were made while in custody, and before any formal proceedings were instituted against the defendant. On January 13, 1920, a criminal information was filed against the defendant in the district court of Grand Forks county charging the defendant with the crime of murder in the first degree. On the same day the defendant was arraigned, entered a plea of guilty, and was sentenced to life imprisonment in the penitentiary. On January 12, 1921, the defendant made a motion for a new trial, asking that the judgment of conviction be vacated and set aside, that he be allowed to withdraw his plea of guilty, and to enter in lieu thereof a plea of not guilty, and that he be granted a jury trial upon the merits. The basis of the motion was that at the time of the killing he was suffering from shell shock, and that he was not responsible mentally, and that at the time of entering his plea of guilty, he was in no condition, physically or mentally, to understand the nature of his act or the results of his plea, and that he was prevented by the officers from procuring legal advice or having an opportunity to prepare for trial.

Held, the generally accepted test of responsibility for crime is the capacity to understand the nature of the act alleged to be criminal, and the ability to distinguish between right and wrong with respect to such act.

A defendant in a criminal action may waive his right to the services of counsel, the procurement of witnesses, or a jury trial.

An examination of the record discloses that at the time of the killing the defendant was mentally able to distinguish between right and wrong, and understood fully the nature of his act; that his confessions were made freely and voluntarily, and with mental capacity to understand their contents and the legal effect thereof.

Evidence held to show no fraud, misrepresentation. coercion, or duress in procuring confession or plea of guilty.

The record shows that no undue advantage was taken of the defendant by the officers of the law, or that he was advised or coerced or forced to enter a plea of guilty. No disposition shown on the part of any of the officers to prevent the defendant from procuring the services of an attorney or having a trial if he wished. He was also admonished by the court as to his right, and for this and other reasons stated in the opinion it is held that the court did not err in denying defendant's motion for a new trial.

Appeal from District Court, Grand Forks County; Cole, Judge.

Joseph Throndson was convicted of murder in the first degree, and he appeals. Affirmed.Jas. A. Peterson and Edward P. Kelly, both of Minneapolis, Minn., for appellant.

Theo. B. Elton, of Grand Forks, for respondent.

McKENNA, District Judge.

On the 13th day of January, 1920, in the district court of Grand Forks county, a criminal information was filed against the defendant Joseph Throndson by the state's attorney of that county charging the defendant with the crime of murder in the first degree, alleging that he did on the 28th day of December, 1919, in said county and state, kill one Elmer Dezell by shooting him with a 25-40 caliber rifle. On the same day the defendant was arraigned in said court, Judge A. T. Cole of the First judicial district presiding, and entered a plea of guilty to the crime as charged in the information. He was thereupon sentenced to life imprisonment in the penitentiary at Bismarck, where he has since been confined.

Some time later the defendant through his attorneys made an application to the State Pardon Board for a pardon, which was denied. On the 12th day of January, 1921, he presented a motion to the district court of Grand Forks county before Judge Cole asking that the judgment of conviction entered in his case on the 13th day of January, 1920, be vacated and set aside, that he be allowed to withdraw his plea of guilty entered therein, and to enter in lieu thereof his plea of not guilty, that the sentence of imprisonment upon such judgment be withdrawn, and that he be granted a trial before a jury upon the merits. The motion was denied, and from this order of the district court entered on the 20th day of September, 1921, denying the motion and refusing to set aside or vacate the judgment of conviction in said cause, the defendant has appealed to this court.

[1] Elmer Dezell was shot and killed at his farm home near Emerado, in Grand Forks county, on the 28th day of December, 1919, by the defendant, Joseph Throndson. The only persons present at the time of the shooting besides the defendant were Nellie Dezell, wife of the deceased, and Clifford Dezell, a son. The defendant shot the said Elmer Dezell with a 25-40 caliber rifle, the first shot taking effect as the said Elmer Dezell stood in the doorway of a small washroom off the kitchen of his farm home. After the first shot Elmer Dezell ran through the house endeavoring to escape through the front door. The defendant followed him, and shot him at least twice more before Dezell succeeded in getting out the front door, where he fell on a snow bank near the house, and died within a very few minutes. The defendant then turned the rifle upon himself, shooting himself through the abdomen, but the wound was not serious, and he recovered in about 10 days.

On the 28th day of December, the defendant, after he had shot Elmer Dezell and inflicted the wound upon himself, was taken to the Deaconess Hospital at Grand Forks, where he remained until discharged on the 7th day of January, 1921. From there he was taken to the county jail where he was detained until the 13th day of January, 1921, when he entered his plea of guilty of the crime of murder, in the first degree, and was sentenced to the state penitentiary at Bismarck for life.

The defendant asks to have the judgment of conviction set aside, and that he be permitted to withdraw his plea of guilty and to go to trial upon the merits upon the following grounds:

First. That at the time he entered his plea of guilty he was not aware of his rights, and did not understand the nature of the defenses which were open to him.

Second. That at the time he entered his plea he was not in a condition mentally to fully realize the meaning and consequences of his plea of guilty.

Third. That at such time he was not in condition to fully weigh and consider his rights, his defense to the charge, and his condition at the time of the homicide.

Fourth. That at such time he was not in a condition or in a position to know or to find out what could or ought to be done in his behalf; in other words, that he was not in a position to know whether he had a defense or not.

Fifth. That at the time of making his statement to the state's attorney he was suffering from loss of blood, from the effect of hypodermic injections, from the excitement of the shooting, and under a severe nervous strain.

Sixth. That he was so surrounded by the officers and state's attorney that he had no opportunity to seek advice or to secure the assistance of an attorney, and, figuratively, the officers had him bound hand and foot while in a weakened condition.

Seventh. That at the time of the killing of Elmer Dezell the defendant was laboring under pressure of fear and illusion brought about by a mind so weakened and wrecked by shell shock that he was positively unable to control himself; that he was not responsible mentally for the shooting of Elmer Dezell, and that at the time of entering his plea of guilty before the district court he was in no condition, physically or mentally, to appreciate that he was not responsible for the murder.

To arrive at a just conclusion as to whether the contentions of the defendant have sufficient merit to warrant this court in setting aside the judgment of conviction, and in order to throw light upon the mental and physical condition of the defendant at the time of the shooting and at the time of entering his plea, it is necessary to scrutinize carefully and methodically the statements as disclosed by the record in reference to the defendant, his life history, his associations with the deceased and the deceased's family, the motive for the murder, and the actions and conduct of the defendant immediately preceding and following the murder and up to the time of his being sentenced to the penitentiary.

On December 28, 1919, the defendant, Joseph Throndson, was 32 or 33 years of age, was a powerfully built man 70 inches high, and weighing 165 pounds. He was born on a farm near Baldwin, Wis., had a common school education, and had followed the work of farm laborer all his life. He had known Elmer Dezell and his family for a long time, and had worked as a farm had for Elmer Dezell covering a period of 7 years, with the exception of 13 months when he was in service during the World War. He was inducted into the army on the 13th day of March, 1918, was sent to Camp Dodge, Iowa, and remained there in training until April 20, 1918, when he was sent to France, reaching the firing line in the month of July the same year. He was overseas about 11 months, and took part in some of the most important battles of the war, namely, St. Mihiel, Meuse Argonne, and the Verdun sector. He was honorably discharged from military service at Camp Dodge, Iowa, on the 2d day of May, 1919, spent a week...