Wagner v. United States

Citation110 F.2d 595
Decision Date03 June 1940
Docket NumberNo. 9164.,9164.
PartiesWAGNER v. UNITED STATES.
CourtUnited States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (5th Circuit)

Wm. W. Flournoy, of De Funiak Springs, Fla., for appellant.

George Earl Hoffman, U. S. Atty., of Pensacola, Fla., for appellee.

Before SIBLEY, HUTCHESON, and McCORD, Circuit Judges.

Writ of Certiorari Denied June 3, 1940. See 60 S.Ct. 1104, 84 L.Ed. ___.

HUTCHESON, Circuit Judge.

Appellant was convicted on eight counts of an indictment, charging him with violations of Sections 338, 339, Title 18 U.S. C.A., using the United States Mails to defraud, in furtherance of a scheme to obtain money and property by means of false and fraudulent representations, pretenses and promises and under a fictitious or false or assumed name. Sentenced to three years upon each count, the sentences to run concurrently, he has appealed upon two grounds. One is that the indictment failed to charge an offense. The other is that he was convicted by the use, over his objection that it was not voluntary, of a confession made to a federal officer while appellant was in his custody.

With the first ground, that the indictment was insufficient, appellant concerns himself but little in the brief, and well he might, for, there is nothing of substance in it. Beyond any kind of question, the indictment sufficiently charges appellant with offenses against the laws of the United States, and is not subject to any of the objections urged against it.

His second point is the one in which appellant puts his trust and on which he really pitches his appeal. In support of it, he earnestly and seriously presses upon us, that within the federal rule, his confession was not voluntary, and therefore the conviction which rests upon it may not stand. Planting himself on Bram v. United States, 168 U.S. 532, 18 S.Ct. 183, 42 L.Ed. 568, and particularly on some of the expressions in it, appellant insists that the evidence as to the circumstances of the giving of the confession taken as a whole, shows that it was not voluntary but obtained by compulsion.

It is the general rule that it is for the court to determine whether a confession objected to as not voluntarily given, is to be admitted in evidence. The District Judge following that rule, first, out of the presence of the jury, heard the testimony as to its giving and ruled it voluntary and admissible, and in addition, as he was permitted to do,1 he submitted the question to the jury and the jury found it voluntary. Under these circumstances, appellant may not prevail here, by merely pointing to his own testimony supporting his claim that the confession was induced by promises. He must show that, taken as a whole, the evidence does not support the finding of judge and jury, and this he cannot do.

For, testimony of the witnesses for the government, especially that of Yearsley and Miss Campbell, shows that within the strictest rule, the confession was voluntarily given. While sometimes differently stated, the principle of the rule requiring the exclusion of confessions, unless voluntary, is...

To continue reading

Request your trial
7 cases
  • Wood v. United States
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — District of Columbia Circuit
    • March 9, 1942
    ...266 U.S. 1, 14, 45 S.Ct. 1, 69 L.Ed. 131, and authorities cited; Hardy v. United States, 1893, 3 App.D.C. 35, 48; Wagner v. United States, 5 Cir., 1940, 110 F.2d 595, certiorari denied, 1940, 310 U.S. 643, 60 S.Ct. 1104, 84 L.Ed. 1411; State v. Hoskins, 1931, 327 Mo. 313, 36 S.W.2d 909. 4 P......
  • Jackson v. Denno, 62
    • United States
    • U.S. Supreme Court
    • June 22, 1964
    ...127, 129 (1962), cert. denied, 372 U.S. 946, 83 S.Ct. 939 (1963); Schaffer v. United States, 221 F.2d 17, 21 (1955); Wagner v. United States, 110 F.2d 595, 596 (1940) cert. denied, 310 U.S. 643, 60 S.Ct. 1104, 84 L.Ed. 1411 (1940). But cf. Duncan v. United States, 197 F.2d 935, 937-938, cer......
  • Patterson v. United States
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit
    • July 21, 1950
    ...upon the evidence offered. Hopt v. Utah, 110 U.S. 574, 583, 4 S.Ct. 202, 28 L.Ed. 262; McCool v. U. S., 6 Cir., 263 F. 55; Wagner v. U. S., 5 Cir., 110 F.2d 595, 596. And where the evidence is conflicting, as here, it is for the jury. Hopt v. Utah, supra; Wilson v. U. S., 162 U.S. 613, at p......
  • Novak v. Dist. Of D.C..
    • United States
    • D.C. Court of Appeals
    • September 25, 1946
    ...States, 232 U.S. 383, 34 S.Ct. 341, 58 L.Ed. 652, L.R.A.1915B, 834, Ann.Cas.1915C, 1177; Moder v. United States, 62 App.D.C. 65, 64 F.2d 703. 4Wagner v. United States, 5 Cir., 110 F.2d 595, 596, certiorari denied 310 U.S. 643, 60 S.Ct. 1104, 84 L.Ed. 1411. 5Wilson v. United States, 162 U.S.......
  • 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