Taylor v. State

Decision Date06 February 1964
Docket Number7 Div. 620
Citation276 Ala. 232,160 So.2d 641
PartiesLeroy TAYLOR v. STATE.
CourtAlabama Supreme Court

Ralph D. Gaines, Jr., Talladega, for appellant.

Richmond M. Flowers, Atty. Gen. and David W. Clark, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.

HARWOOD, Justice.

This appellant, Leroy Taylor, has been adjudged guilty of murder in the first degree and sentenced to death.

At the trial below, he pled not guilty, and not guilty by reason of insanity.

The evidence presented by the State tends to show that Cynthia Marie Hawkins, a negro girl seven years of age, lived with her family in Furnace quarters, a negro section in the City of Talladega. Dye Creek ran along the back of the area several hundred feet back of the Hawkins' home.

The family was large, with brothers and sisters ranging from three years up to twenty-three years of age.

On the morning of 6 April 1963, Cynthia Marie and one of the younger children were playing in the yard of her home. The appellant arrived and joined in the play with the children for awhile. About 11:00 A.M., it was discovered that Cynthia Marie was missing, and several of her brothers and half brothers organized a search party. Cynthia Marie's body was discovered around 2:00 P.M., face down in Dye Creek in about a foot of water. The body was taken to the home and laid on a bed. Foam was emerging from her nostrils and mouth.

Thereupon Horace Hawkins, a brother of deceased, aged sixteen, and Albert Powers, her half brother, aged twenty-three, ran to the home of Ola Mae Perkins, the 'girl friend' of appellant, in search of the appellant.

The appellant was located at Ola Mae's house. The brothers entered the house and confronted the appellant. Albert asked him why he had drowned their sister. The appellant denied any knowledge of Cynthia Marie's death, and 'acted like he didn't know anything about it.'

Horace and Albert then began an attack upon the appellant. The fight continued out into the yard. Horace picked up a brick and hit the appellant on the back of the head. This blow knocked the appellant to the ground semi-conscious.

Others had gathered at the melee and intervened at this point to stop further assault by the brothers, one of the intervenors pulling a knife.

At this stage, Pearlie Mae Hawkins, mother of the deceased and of Albert and Horace, arrived on the scene. Albert told her that the appellant had killed Cynthia Marie. She took Albert and Horace with her to their home.

Law enforcement officers were called. They went to the Hawkins' home. The body of Cynthia Marie was still there. After some investigation by the officers at the scene, the body was moved to an undertaking establishment. A search was instituted for the appellant, not only by the law officers, but by a number of the residents of Furnace quarters.

About dark, June Pointer, an uncle by marriage and with whom the appellant lived most of the time, was told that the appellant was in Pointer's car in front of his home.

We note here that the whereabouts of appellant's father was unknown, and appellant's mother lived in Ohio.

Pointer went out and with the appellant started to police headquarters. On the way they met a police car and Pointer informed the officer that the appellant was in his car and was told to bring the appellant on to the jail. This Pointer did, remaining only about five minutes at the jail.

Mr. Robert D. Johnson, a State Toxicologist with eight years experience, arrived in Talladega in the late afternoon. He performed an autopsy on the body of Cynthia Marie. He found that the foam exuding from the month and nostrils extended down into the lungs. This is typical in case of death by drowning. Mr. Johnson also found lacerations on the cheek and head and gravel lacerations on the back. He also found the anus dilated, with a mild laceration on the inside.

Between 8 and 9 P.M., the police brought June Pointer to the jail to be present when the appellant was interviewed. Among those present at the interview was Mr. Johnson. After explaining to the appellant the purpose of the interview, and that information secured could be used in event he was prosecuted, the appellant voluntarily removed his trousers and shirt, the only clothing he was wearing, and consented to a physical examination. This examination disclosed nothing significant. The appellant denied any knowledge of, or connection with, the death of Cynthia Marie. When told he could go home, June Pointer stated it would be best for him to stay in jail that night where 'they could take care of him' as 'he already done got beat up.' This was referring to the fight between Cynthia Marie's brothers and the appellant in the afternoon.

Every person at the interview, including June Pointer, negatived any possibility of any force, threats, or abuse being exercised by anyone against the appellant.

The appellant remained in jail that night.

The next morning Chief Dison of the Talladega Police went to the Hawkins' home for further investigation. There he interviewed several of the younger brothers of the deceased who had been playing with Cynthia Marie the morning before. The chief returned to his office where he had the children brought in pairs and interviewed in the presence of the appellant.

When he was talking with Ronnie Hawkins, age four, and Bobbie Lee Hawkins in the appellant's presence, Ronnie stated that Leroy (the appellant) 'had twisted Cynthia's arm, pulled her down through the woods, and throwed her in the creek.'

At this point the appellant stated that was not the way it had happened, and then began to make a statement confessory in nature. Chief Dison had Ronnie and Bobbie Lee leave the room, and then listened to a confession by the appellant. Chief Dison immediately had Officer R. M. Rowe come into his office, and the appellant again repeated his confession. Chief Dison thereupon reduced the confession to writing, and it was signed by the appellant, who also signed each page of the confession. This, after Chief Dison had read the document to the appellant.

This confession was received in evidence, the predicate of voluntarinesss having been previously established, not only to the confession itself, but to every confessory statement or admission against interest made by the appellant.

The parts of this confession pertinent to this review read:

'* * * about 12:00 noon I met the children, after playing with them awhile, I got Cynthia Marie' (Hawkins) 'by the hand and we walked down through the woods. I told her to come and go with me. She did not resist or anything--I didn't have anything on my mind and did not think of doing anything to her until we got down to the creek. When we got to the creek is when it flashed to my mind to do something to her. She laid down when I asked...

To continue reading

Request your trial
21 cases
  • Bracewell v. State
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals
    • November 12, 1986
    ...committed, requires the submission of such question to the jury. Johnson v. State, 247 Ala. 271, 24 So.2d 17 (1946); Taylor v. State, 276 Ala. 232, 160 So.2d 641 (1964). Reasonable inferences may furnish a basis for proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Royals v. State, 36 Ala.App. 11, 56 So.2d ......
  • Watters v. State
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals
    • May 30, 1978
    ...committed, requires the submission of such question to the jury. Johnson v. State, 247 Ala. 271, 24 So.2d 17 (1946); Taylor v. State, 276 Ala. 232, 160 So.2d 641 (1964). Reasonable inferences may furnish a basis for proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Royals v. State, 36 Ala.App. 11, 56 So.2d ......
  • Davis v. State
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals
    • July 28, 1987
    ...overwhelmingly establishes the corpus delicti of murder. Johnson v. State, 473 So.2d 607, 609 (Ala.Cr.App.1985); Taylor v. State, 276 Ala. 232, 236, 160 So.2d 641 (1964); Jones v. State, 260 Ala. 341, 345, 70 So.2d 629 (1954). The issue remains whether this murder was committed during a rob......
  • Lockett v. State
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals
    • January 28, 1986
    ...committed, requires the submission of such question to the jury. Johnson v. State, 247 Ala. 271, 24 So.2d 17 (1946); Taylor v. State, 276 Ala. 232, 160 So.2d 641 (1964). Reasonable inferences may furnish a basis for proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Royals v. State, 36 Ala.App. 11, 56 So.2d ......
  • 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