Terry v. State
Decision Date | 04 August 1925 |
Docket Number | 8 Div. 264 |
Citation | 21 Ala.App. 100,105 So. 386 |
Parties | TERRY v. STATE. |
Court | Alabama Court of Appeals |
Rehearing Denied Aug. 11, 1925
Appeal from Circuit Court, Lawrence County; James E. Horton, Judge.
Frank Terry was convicted of manslaughter in the first degree, and he appeals. Reversed and remanded.
G.O Chenault, of Albany, for appellant.
Harwell G. Davis, Atty. Gen., and Lamar Field, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
One of the principal questions presented calls for a construction of section 6 (Bill of Rights) of the Constitution of Alabama 1901. This section provides, among other things, that in all criminal prosecutions the accused has a right to be heard by himself and counsel, to demand the nature and cause of the accusation, and to be confronted by the witnesses against him; also to testify in his own behalf if he elects to do so nor shall he be deprived of life, liberty, or property except by due process of law, etc.
This defendant was charged with the offense of murder in the first degree. He was a deaf-mute and had been so from his birth. Not being able to speak or hear, the court was requested to appoint an interpreter so that defendant might be informed as to the nature and cause of the accusation against him, and also as to the testimony of the witnesses who appeared against him. In this connection the following occurred, as shown by the record:
The exceptions here reserved were well taken, and must be sustained. As stated, the Constitution of this state expressly provides that an accused has a right to be heard by himself and counsel, also, to demand the nature and cause of the accusation against him, and, further to be confronted by the witnesses who are to testify against him. In construing this constitutional provision it needs no discussion in deciding that all this must be done in a manner by which the accused can know, the nature and cause of the accusation he is called upon to answer, and all necessary means must be provided to this end. It must also be provided, and the law so contemplates, that the accused must not only be confronted...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
US v. Mosquera, No. CR 92-1228(JBW)
...and cause of the accusation he is called upon to answer, and all necessary means must be provided to this end." Terry v. State, 21 Ala.App. 100, 105 So. 386, 387 (1925) (reversing conviction of a deaf mute). See also State v. Vasquez, 101 Utah 444, 121 P.2d 903, 906 (1942) (reversing convic......
-
United States ex rel. Navarro v. Johnson
...the presence of an interpreter was not conclusive on the question of defendant's understanding of the proceedings, and Terry v. State, 21 Ala.App. 100, 105 So. 386 (1925), where the right to an interpreter was extended to a deaf A bill was recently introduced in the Congress to establish bi......
-
Williams v. State, 6 Div. 48
...So. 119 (1910); Watts v. State, 177 Ala. 24, 59 So. 270 (1912); Mosley v. State, 22 Ala.App. 95, 112 So. 811 (1927); Terry v. State, 21 Ala.App. 100, 105 So. 386 (1925); Resmando v. State, 24 Ala.App. 566, 138 So. 425 In Wilkinson, 361 So.2d at 404, this Court held that "it is not error to ......
-
United States ex rel. Negron v. State of New York
...to a court-appointed interpreter in a factual background closely akin to the present one. As aptly stated in Terry v. State, 21 Ala.App. 100, 101-102, 105 So. 386, 387 (1925): "* * * the accused must not only be confronted by the witnesses against him, but he must be accorded all necessary ......