United States v. Inman, No. 10025.

CourtUnited States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (4th Circuit)
Writing for the CourtHAYNSWORTH, , BRYAN, Circuit , and BUTZNER
Citation352 F.2d 954
PartiesUNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Richard Floyd INMAN, Appellant.
Decision Date18 November 1965
Docket NumberNo. 10025.

352 F.2d 954 (1965)

UNITED STATES of America, Appellee,
v.
Richard Floyd INMAN, Appellant.

No. 10025.

United States Court of Appeals Fourth Circuit.

Argued October 6, 1965.

Decided November 18, 1965.


352 F.2d 955

Joseph C. Ward, Jr., Fayetteville, N. C. (Court-assigned counsel), for appellant.

John R. Hooten, Asst. U. S. Atty. (Robert H. Cowen, U. S. Atty., on the brief), for appellee.

Before HAYNSWORTH, Chief Judge, BRYAN, Circuit Judge, and BUTZNER, District Judge.

ALBERT V. BRYAN, Circuit Judge.

To set aside his conviction for the interstate transportation of a stolen motor vehicle, 18 U.S.C. § 2312, Richard Floyd Inman now assigns as error the actions of the District Court upon his confession. Although not voluntary, he says, it was nevertheless received in evidence and, further, that thereafter the question of its voluntariness was not submitted to the jury as an issue of fact.

In our view the admission of the confession was proper, but we must reverse because of the failure of the Court to leave to the jury the ultimate decision upon voluntariness.

Upon objection to the confession when tendered by the Government, the District Judge in the absence of the jury heard testimony both of the prosecution and the accused on the single issue of voluntariness. He ruled in favor of the Government, the jury was recalled and the confession proved. In its charge to the jury the Court did not touch upon the confession or its circumstances.

True, the defendant did not request an instruction on this point. But before the panel retired, after delivery of the charge, he asked the Court to give "a specific instruction on the confession; that they could find that the confession was induced by promise or reward or getting out of jail". The request was declined.

The judge was of the opinion that the question of voluntariness was exclusively a matter of law, not something for the jury, and as he had ruled the confession voluntary after the preliminary inquiry, no instruction thereon was appropriate. In this he was apparently persuaded by what is sometimes called the "orthodox view". See Jackson v. Denno, 378 U.S. 368, 378, 84 S.Ct. 1774, 12 L.Ed.2d 908 (1964). There is, concededly, authority

352 F.2d 956
at least implying that this procedure in State prosecutions is not Constitutionally impermissible. Ibid. But see id. at 401, 84 S.Ct. 1774 (Black, J., dissenting)

However, this Circuit has required that the final appraisal of the confession be left to...

To continue reading

Request your trial
89 practice notes
  • U.S. v. Abu Ali, No. CRIM.A. 05-53GBL.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 4th Circuit. United States District Court (Eastern District of Virginia)
    • October 25, 2005
    ...by the jury, and the defense and the government are free to argue the issue to the jury at that juncture. United States v. Inman, 352 F.2d 954, 956 (4th Cir.1965) (prescribing the "Massachusetts Doctrine" for determining the voluntariness of confessions in federal prosecutions in the Fourth......
  • Ralph v. Warden, Maryland Penitentiary, No. 13757.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (4th Circuit)
    • December 11, 1970
    ...because the court did not find it voluntary beyond a reasonable doubt. This standard, he claims, is required by United States v. Inman, 352 F.2d 954 (4th Cir. 1965), and Mullins v. United States, 382 F.2d 258 (4th Cir. 1967), which hold that federal courts in this circuit must find a confes......
  • Pea v. United States, No. 20433.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (District of Columbia)
    • December 20, 1967
    ...the issue of the extent of the prosecution's burden of proving voluntariness. The District Judge, taking note of United States v. Inman, 352 F.2d 954 (4th Cir. 1965), found that voluntariness had been established beyond a reasonable doubt. If that is the appropriate standard, we are clear t......
  • U.S. v. Powe, No. 77-1172
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (District of Columbia)
    • January 19, 1979
    ...its factual setting. . . . The court will thereupon independently determine whether the confession is admissible." United States v. Inman, 352 F.2d 954, 956 (4th Cir. 1965) (emphasis added). The Inman procedure also requires that the trial judge, if satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt of th......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
89 cases
  • U.S. v. Abu Ali, No. CRIM.A. 05-53GBL.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 4th Circuit. United States District Court (Eastern District of Virginia)
    • October 25, 2005
    ...by the jury, and the defense and the government are free to argue the issue to the jury at that juncture. United States v. Inman, 352 F.2d 954, 956 (4th Cir.1965) (prescribing the "Massachusetts Doctrine" for determining the voluntariness of confessions in federal prosecutions in the Fourth......
  • Ralph v. Warden, Maryland Penitentiary, No. 13757.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (4th Circuit)
    • December 11, 1970
    ...because the court did not find it voluntary beyond a reasonable doubt. This standard, he claims, is required by United States v. Inman, 352 F.2d 954 (4th Cir. 1965), and Mullins v. United States, 382 F.2d 258 (4th Cir. 1967), which hold that federal courts in this circuit must find a confes......
  • Pea v. United States, No. 20433.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (District of Columbia)
    • December 20, 1967
    ...the issue of the extent of the prosecution's burden of proving voluntariness. The District Judge, taking note of United States v. Inman, 352 F.2d 954 (4th Cir. 1965), found that voluntariness had been established beyond a reasonable doubt. If that is the appropriate standard, we are clear t......
  • U.S. v. Powe, No. 77-1172
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (District of Columbia)
    • January 19, 1979
    ...its factual setting. . . . The court will thereupon independently determine whether the confession is admissible." United States v. Inman, 352 F.2d 954, 956 (4th Cir. 1965) (emphasis added). The Inman procedure also requires that the trial judge, if satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt of 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